Aprendizado
Investment in Education in Latin America
Argentine economist, Latin America evolves on the issue of funding , but public schools must meet new contingents of students and improve the quality
Public investments in education have been growing throughout Latin America, but are still far from being sufficient for their countries meet their populations satisfactorily. But there are those , such as Argentina , Mexico and Brazil , where new demands are being generated due to advances , and others, such as Guatemala , where public investment still crawling around 2 % of GDP .
Alejandro Morduchowicz , Argentine economist Buenos Aires office of the Planning Institute of Unesco and specialist in education funding , the continent still has some big challenges to solve . Between them to transform their teaching to meet the students who until recently were out of it and to advance the quality issue. Read below the interview with editor Reuben Barros .
The National Education Conference , held in Brasilia a few days ago , approved the proposal to establish 10 % of GDP the value of investments in education. How do you see this decision?
First you need to know what the needs are . Depending on them , they will say the percentage is enough or not. UNESCO traditionally proposes to developing countries somewhere around 6 % of GDP .
For several countries in Latin America that invest that percentage , but in some it seems insufficient . This value is related to the size of the educational system of the country and its wealth, the quality you expect to achieve.
But it is an achievement ? How much, on average , than other Latin American countries have invested ?
Like everything, fix a percentage of GDP has advantages and disadvantages . The advantage is that if the country grows and there are more resources , they will be allocated to education, the disadvantage is that , in times of crisis , investment in education is linked to the economy . However, it is an improvement over the current situation. As for the 10 % we would have to see what the needs of Basic Education in Brazil . Is there much difference between this investment and higher level , and in this respect the country differs greatly from other Latin American countries . The average investment in education in relation to GDP in Latin America is 4.6 % , much lower than that of most developed OECD countries and Europe . There are countries that have 5 % or 6 % . In Argentina , there is a funding bill since 2006 that proposed to reach 6 % in 2010 , ie five years. And being fulfilled . The curious thing is that we always had a demand for this level of investment and now that we are achieving , we see that it is insufficient . We begin, then, to discuss increasing this percentage . The reality is that the economy of our countries has grown in recent years , and education systems should take advantage of this growth for more resources .
Countries that have more inefficient education systems or not yet universalized Basic Education should not invest more , as did South Korea from the 60s ?
The example of Korea is not comparable due to their political regime . However , the interesting thing here is the starting point , they were worse than many countries in the 60s and made a commitment to education to fill the gaps they had. There are Latin American countries that spend less than 2 % of GDP , such as Guatemala or some Central American countries who are totally dependent on outside help. In Guatemala , most high school students attending private schools because public investment is insufficient. Countries in the region that can be compared to Brazil , Argentina, Mexico, invest this time around 6 % . I know some statistics on Brazil , but I think here compute the percentage of education pensions of teachers , which other countries do not. This is not really an investment in education is a statistical feature . Obviously there are retirements , but it is a social security spending , and it artificially inflates investments .
The funds that pay the networks according to the number of students in each stage of education are the fairer redistribution of federal funds to federal agencies system?
Yes In macro level , distribute according to the number of students is correct and proper , because the number of students determines the need for funding we have. That's what first made Fundef that FUNDEB expanded . Once these funds been affected , taking into account the different specific needs of each level of education ,
maybe we ought to also take into account unmet basic needs or economic indicators aiming at improvement , but the basis of calculation should always be a student . In Argentina , some funds distribute their funds according to the number of teachers , but in this case it can reward those who are most inefficient and appointed more teachers than necessary .
So redistribute per student is the system that makes the most effective right to education?
The base shall be the amount of students . In a federal system , when redistribute resources among different levels of government , it should incorporate the fiscal capacity of the states , which are not equal . A richest state in terms of tax revenue can invest more on education than poorer another. One of the functions that have a central government is treated, or at least reduce these distances . In this sense , Fundef and Fundeb improved the situation that existed before . What you should see is whether or not it is necessary to emphasize the redistributive measures .
Isolated programs may be good public policy ?
There is a trend there are already 15 , 20 years, and it escapes to finance, which believes that a public policy is a sum of programs . Would need to define what is a public policy . Sometimes a program for every problem it creates and it directs resources . But the question is which program effectiveness, and obviously as redistribute resources .
Education has gone through a process of financialization worldwide. In Brazil , the amount of funds handled by private education rose from U.S. $ 10 billion in 2001 to U.S. $ 90 billion in 2008 . What impact do these have on public education funding ?
In theory, this should add resources to education . The problem would be if governments , seeing that there are private investment , lessened their allocation of resources . That's how the crowding out : if I see another 100 invested , I no longer have need to invest these 100 . At least in the Argentine case , fold the bet : every weight that the private sector invests , the public sector must invest more , so it is not at a disadvantage . Is discussed the link between the budget and the quality of education . If the private sector is investing heavily in education, great, because we are in a capitalist system and it is better to invest in education. The problem is that the public sector is doing against it . Private investment should not increase the gap between students who go to private school and those who go to public school . That's a bit what happened in Chile .
How do you see ProUni ?
In Brazil , the tradition has always been that the public sector does not subsidize private school . But when you give a grant to the student to go to a private university, is actually a subsidy to this university . This happens because there is a subsidy. If there were not , would the public school student would there? I believe this allows or favors you go. The private sector to invest in private universities , is what usually happens . The problem is when the public sector is subsidizing the private sector and does the same with the public sector itself , with its own premises .
In your studies , you have appointed mechanisms for the recovery of public school students that would shape the privatization of public education. What are they?
There were cases in Latin America where it is allowed to charge a fee for access of students who would compete for a spot in the state schools . In some cases , there was an annual fee , or even monthly . There is a contradiction between the requirement and supply of this type of recovery . If the State establishes that it is required , can not charge . It's like a vaccination system , establish whether the vaccine against tuberculosis is mandatory , I can not charge it because the poor can not afford. Colombia is the only country that legally acknowledges that there is recovery in schools . Even though most schools make no recovery , no legal permission for this to happen . In other countries, schools are charged a fee in order to obtain resources that the state did not give them , but it was deleted . Guatemala, El Salvador , Nicaragua , Ecuador are countries where parents had to pay a fee to send their children to state schools . And that , more than one type of privatization , is a type of exclusion, because the parent can not afford to send her son leaves not only to private school, but also to the state .
And this has been reversed ?
In Ecuador , was suspended two to three years. In Guatemala and El Salvador , two years ago . And when taking a decision, the budget for public schools has to grow immediately , to compensate for what the families paid and the increased demand caused by families who could not afford and did not send their children to school . What happens in the rest of Latin America in terms of right to education is that the problem is not the issue fee or a parent can pay when you send a child to school in the state, but the amount you pay in addition when the child goes to school - textbooks , uniform, backpack. When parents of lower economic strata have to pay to buy the books for their children , this is also a problem . If books are not transferred and whether there is a school scholarship or something , the care of the right to education becomes problematic .
But there are still other models , such as Chile ...
In Chile , unlike what happens in the rest of Latin America , the money would go to schools was directly linked to the amount of students in each unit. What happened - and that was part of the student uprising in 2006 that was - that was the amount that was paid per student was the same in all schools . It would occur , for example , U.S. $ 100 per student. But as the needs were not the same , because some schools receiving students from disadvantaged socioeconomic point of view, the gap was widening. So what Chile has shown is that this egalitarian aspiration is not feasible , because the starting point of the students is not the same . This caused the revolt of students and had to do a makeover and introduce the so-called " preferential subsidy" , in that there is more to schools where there are students from disadvantaged socioeconomic point of view.
In Brazil , the families whose children are in private schools have the right to deduct a value of income tax . How do you see this mechanism in relation to the right to education ?
Some economists say this is fair because everyone goes for . But can only deduct those who have a high income. So it's not for everyone , for those who have high incomes may not enjoy . Some say that if we allow not discount them , are paying for their children's education twice, once to pay the taxes , another when they send their children to school . The difference is that send their children to private school is a personal decision . The point is that these are tax revenues that the state stops receiving . The question is : why should direct public money to subsidize private goals ? If you send your child on his own, that's your problem, because public schools need a lot of resources.
If we compare Latin America of the 70s and today , the care of the right to education has improved ?
The average years of schooling in the continent is increasing , 60s to now, around a year every decade. Thus , coverage grew . In Brazil , for example , has expanded very '50s to today . Argentina reached before universal primary school and kept , but Paraguay, Bolivia , who were among the latest of the continent , has increased dramatically . But when it really increases the coverage , new demands are generated . When it reaches the universal fundamental level , for example , there is pressure to also get it on the middle level . And the other challenge that emerged throughout Latin America is the quality . With the universal , joined in schools traditionally excluded sectors and this requires new teaching practices , curriculum and rethink everything that happens within the school. These demands , in turn , require more funding . Because if coverage increases and funding remains stable , the cost per student is being reduced. And we're talking about schooling a student who is not middle class , which requires more things - the backpack , books , certain social conditions of learning that are not the same . And this requires a larger investment.
- Brazil Will Best In Education That Argentina, Colombia And Peru
Brazil will best in education that Argentina, Colombia and Peru No Latin American country even come to half of the evaluation program ranking Luisa Ferreira, the R7 The difference in national average (401) and the Colombian nation, led by Juan Manuel...
- Pne Approved Is 10% Of Gdp For Education
PNE approved is 10% of GDP for education Federal House approves allocation of resources in the order of 10% of GDP for education, as envisaged in the National Education Plan Federal House approves allocation of resources in the order of 10% of GDP for...
- Countries Where Teachers Are Better Paid
Countries Where Teachers are better paid Many countries invest heavily in the education of their country , but not all do it for lack of investment or lack of interest even . Learn about the countries that pay higher salaries for teachers . Countries...
- Education In Chile
Education in Chile responsible National resources for education literacy 95.7 % Education index 0.918 ( 46th in the world ) PISA reading mathematics science diplomas • Secondary Education • Higher Education Pupil Teacher Ratio x...
- Education In Brazil
Education in Brazil Introduction Currently, education is considered one of the most important sectors for the development of a nation. It is through the production of knowledge that a country grows, increasing their income and quality of life. Although...
Aprendizado
Investment in Education in Latin America
Investment in Education in Latin America
Argentine economist, Latin America evolves on the issue of funding , but public schools must meet new contingents of students and improve the quality
Public investments in education have been growing throughout Latin America, but are still far from being sufficient for their countries meet their populations satisfactorily. But there are those , such as Argentina , Mexico and Brazil , where new demands are being generated due to advances , and others, such as Guatemala , where public investment still crawling around 2 % of GDP .
Alejandro Morduchowicz , Argentine economist Buenos Aires office of the Planning Institute of Unesco and specialist in education funding , the continent still has some big challenges to solve . Between them to transform their teaching to meet the students who until recently were out of it and to advance the quality issue. Read below the interview with editor Reuben Barros .
The National Education Conference , held in Brasilia a few days ago , approved the proposal to establish 10 % of GDP the value of investments in education. How do you see this decision?
First you need to know what the needs are . Depending on them , they will say the percentage is enough or not. UNESCO traditionally proposes to developing countries somewhere around 6 % of GDP .
For several countries in Latin America that invest that percentage , but in some it seems insufficient . This value is related to the size of the educational system of the country and its wealth, the quality you expect to achieve.
But it is an achievement ? How much, on average , than other Latin American countries have invested ?
Like everything, fix a percentage of GDP has advantages and disadvantages . The advantage is that if the country grows and there are more resources , they will be allocated to education, the disadvantage is that , in times of crisis , investment in education is linked to the economy . However, it is an improvement over the current situation. As for the 10 % we would have to see what the needs of Basic Education in Brazil . Is there much difference between this investment and higher level , and in this respect the country differs greatly from other Latin American countries . The average investment in education in relation to GDP in Latin America is 4.6 % , much lower than that of most developed OECD countries and Europe . There are countries that have 5 % or 6 % . In Argentina , there is a funding bill since 2006 that proposed to reach 6 % in 2010 , ie five years. And being fulfilled . The curious thing is that we always had a demand for this level of investment and now that we are achieving , we see that it is insufficient . We begin, then, to discuss increasing this percentage . The reality is that the economy of our countries has grown in recent years , and education systems should take advantage of this growth for more resources .
Countries that have more inefficient education systems or not yet universalized Basic Education should not invest more , as did South Korea from the 60s ?
The example of Korea is not comparable due to their political regime . However , the interesting thing here is the starting point , they were worse than many countries in the 60s and made a commitment to education to fill the gaps they had. There are Latin American countries that spend less than 2 % of GDP , such as Guatemala or some Central American countries who are totally dependent on outside help. In Guatemala , most high school students attending private schools because public investment is insufficient. Countries in the region that can be compared to Brazil , Argentina, Mexico, invest this time around 6 % . I know some statistics on Brazil , but I think here compute the percentage of education pensions of teachers , which other countries do not. This is not really an investment in education is a statistical feature . Obviously there are retirements , but it is a social security spending , and it artificially inflates investments .
The funds that pay the networks according to the number of students in each stage of education are the fairer redistribution of federal funds to federal agencies system?
Yes In macro level , distribute according to the number of students is correct and proper , because the number of students determines the need for funding we have. That's what first made Fundef that FUNDEB expanded . Once these funds been affected , taking into account the different specific needs of each level of education ,
maybe we ought to also take into account unmet basic needs or economic indicators aiming at improvement , but the basis of calculation should always be a student . In Argentina , some funds distribute their funds according to the number of teachers , but in this case it can reward those who are most inefficient and appointed more teachers than necessary .
So redistribute per student is the system that makes the most effective right to education?
The base shall be the amount of students . In a federal system , when redistribute resources among different levels of government , it should incorporate the fiscal capacity of the states , which are not equal . A richest state in terms of tax revenue can invest more on education than poorer another. One of the functions that have a central government is treated, or at least reduce these distances . In this sense , Fundef and Fundeb improved the situation that existed before . What you should see is whether or not it is necessary to emphasize the redistributive measures .
Isolated programs may be good public policy ?
There is a trend there are already 15 , 20 years, and it escapes to finance, which believes that a public policy is a sum of programs . Would need to define what is a public policy . Sometimes a program for every problem it creates and it directs resources . But the question is which program effectiveness, and obviously as redistribute resources .
Education has gone through a process of financialization worldwide. In Brazil , the amount of funds handled by private education rose from U.S. $ 10 billion in 2001 to U.S. $ 90 billion in 2008 . What impact do these have on public education funding ?
In theory, this should add resources to education . The problem would be if governments , seeing that there are private investment , lessened their allocation of resources . That's how the crowding out : if I see another 100 invested , I no longer have need to invest these 100 . At least in the Argentine case , fold the bet : every weight that the private sector invests , the public sector must invest more , so it is not at a disadvantage . Is discussed the link between the budget and the quality of education . If the private sector is investing heavily in education, great, because we are in a capitalist system and it is better to invest in education. The problem is that the public sector is doing against it . Private investment should not increase the gap between students who go to private school and those who go to public school . That's a bit what happened in Chile .
How do you see ProUni ?
In Brazil , the tradition has always been that the public sector does not subsidize private school . But when you give a grant to the student to go to a private university, is actually a subsidy to this university . This happens because there is a subsidy. If there were not , would the public school student would there? I believe this allows or favors you go. The private sector to invest in private universities , is what usually happens . The problem is when the public sector is subsidizing the private sector and does the same with the public sector itself , with its own premises .
In your studies , you have appointed mechanisms for the recovery of public school students that would shape the privatization of public education. What are they?
There were cases in Latin America where it is allowed to charge a fee for access of students who would compete for a spot in the state schools . In some cases , there was an annual fee , or even monthly . There is a contradiction between the requirement and supply of this type of recovery . If the State establishes that it is required , can not charge . It's like a vaccination system , establish whether the vaccine against tuberculosis is mandatory , I can not charge it because the poor can not afford. Colombia is the only country that legally acknowledges that there is recovery in schools . Even though most schools make no recovery , no legal permission for this to happen . In other countries, schools are charged a fee in order to obtain resources that the state did not give them , but it was deleted . Guatemala, El Salvador , Nicaragua , Ecuador are countries where parents had to pay a fee to send their children to state schools . And that , more than one type of privatization , is a type of exclusion, because the parent can not afford to send her son leaves not only to private school, but also to the state .
And this has been reversed ?
In Ecuador , was suspended two to three years. In Guatemala and El Salvador , two years ago . And when taking a decision, the budget for public schools has to grow immediately , to compensate for what the families paid and the increased demand caused by families who could not afford and did not send their children to school . What happens in the rest of Latin America in terms of right to education is that the problem is not the issue fee or a parent can pay when you send a child to school in the state, but the amount you pay in addition when the child goes to school - textbooks , uniform, backpack. When parents of lower economic strata have to pay to buy the books for their children , this is also a problem . If books are not transferred and whether there is a school scholarship or something , the care of the right to education becomes problematic .
But there are still other models , such as Chile ...
In Chile , unlike what happens in the rest of Latin America , the money would go to schools was directly linked to the amount of students in each unit. What happened - and that was part of the student uprising in 2006 that was - that was the amount that was paid per student was the same in all schools . It would occur , for example , U.S. $ 100 per student. But as the needs were not the same , because some schools receiving students from disadvantaged socioeconomic point of view, the gap was widening. So what Chile has shown is that this egalitarian aspiration is not feasible , because the starting point of the students is not the same . This caused the revolt of students and had to do a makeover and introduce the so-called " preferential subsidy" , in that there is more to schools where there are students from disadvantaged socioeconomic point of view.
In Brazil , the families whose children are in private schools have the right to deduct a value of income tax . How do you see this mechanism in relation to the right to education ?
Some economists say this is fair because everyone goes for . But can only deduct those who have a high income. So it's not for everyone , for those who have high incomes may not enjoy . Some say that if we allow not discount them , are paying for their children's education twice, once to pay the taxes , another when they send their children to school . The difference is that send their children to private school is a personal decision . The point is that these are tax revenues that the state stops receiving . The question is : why should direct public money to subsidize private goals ? If you send your child on his own, that's your problem, because public schools need a lot of resources.
If we compare Latin America of the 70s and today , the care of the right to education has improved ?
The average years of schooling in the continent is increasing , 60s to now, around a year every decade. Thus , coverage grew . In Brazil , for example , has expanded very '50s to today . Argentina reached before universal primary school and kept , but Paraguay, Bolivia , who were among the latest of the continent , has increased dramatically . But when it really increases the coverage , new demands are generated . When it reaches the universal fundamental level , for example , there is pressure to also get it on the middle level . And the other challenge that emerged throughout Latin America is the quality . With the universal , joined in schools traditionally excluded sectors and this requires new teaching practices , curriculum and rethink everything that happens within the school. These demands , in turn , require more funding . Because if coverage increases and funding remains stable , the cost per student is being reduced. And we're talking about schooling a student who is not middle class , which requires more things - the backpack , books , certain social conditions of learning that are not the same . And this requires a larger investment.
loading...
- Brazil Will Best In Education That Argentina, Colombia And Peru
Brazil will best in education that Argentina, Colombia and Peru No Latin American country even come to half of the evaluation program ranking Luisa Ferreira, the R7 The difference in national average (401) and the Colombian nation, led by Juan Manuel...
- Pne Approved Is 10% Of Gdp For Education
PNE approved is 10% of GDP for education Federal House approves allocation of resources in the order of 10% of GDP for education, as envisaged in the National Education Plan Federal House approves allocation of resources in the order of 10% of GDP for...
- Countries Where Teachers Are Better Paid
Countries Where Teachers are better paid Many countries invest heavily in the education of their country , but not all do it for lack of investment or lack of interest even . Learn about the countries that pay higher salaries for teachers . Countries...
- Education In Chile
Education in Chile responsible National resources for education literacy 95.7 % Education index 0.918 ( 46th in the world ) PISA reading mathematics science diplomas • Secondary Education • Higher Education Pupil Teacher Ratio x...
- Education In Brazil
Education in Brazil Introduction Currently, education is considered one of the most important sectors for the development of a nation. It is through the production of knowledge that a country grows, increasing their income and quality of life. Although...