I got to go to a really interesting meeting today. I pretty much had nothing to contribute, so it was very nice of Babette to let me just sit in an observe the process. Kind of felt like I got to eat at the grownups' table.
I don't think I've ever really clearly explained what I'm working on this summer, partly because I didn't have a good understanding of it myself. But after this meeting, I think I can give it a shot. The EPDC (Education Policy and Data Center, which is my group) is preparing a report that will analyze many different indicators (enrollment rates, completion rates, gender gap, urban/rural gap, literacy rates, etc) to determine how well countries are progressing towards EFA (Education For All). The EPDC is looking for patterns and trends so that they can say, for example, that if Mali receives no intervention, it will reach a 95% primary school enrollment rate by around 2075. There are already some interesing correlations that have come out of the data. For example, classroom size has no correlation with quality of education, but student:teacher ratio does; once it gets above 50:1, all other indicators of learning quality completely stagnate. This is of interest, because it suggests that instead of spending money to build more schools, donors should focus on educating teachers (ratios of 140:1 in primary schools are not uncommon in many countries right now). The report will be used by education ministries within countries to diagnose problem areas, and will also be used by potential donors to determine how their money would be best spent.
[the following may be somewhat disjointed paragraphs, since I'm just trying to record my impressions from the meeting]
Of course there are lots of reports on the status of education in various countries, but (as I understand it) this report will be unique because it is based on household surveys rather than adminstrative data. So rather than relying on the school principal to report enrollment rates, independent NGOs go door to door and ask about the education history of each person in the household. This is good for many reasons, but I personally think it's cool that from one year's survey, you can get a picture of what education has been like for the last 60 or so years. If you find out that 37% of the 40-year-olds in Nigeria are literate (can read a sentence presented by the interviewer), then you can with reasonable accuracy say that that reflects the educational system that existed 25 years ago, when those 40-year-olds were finishing primary school.
Since the early nineties, there has been a big push for EFA, but unfortunately countries are feeling pressure to boost enrollment rates, and this sometimes comes at the expense of actually improving the quality of the education. For example, in Egypt, 95% of children complete 5th grade, but only 21% can read a sentence. When completing primary school doesn't even confer basic literacy, the whole concept of UPE (universal primary education) loses all value. The data that the EPDC is presenting shows very clearly the deficits in education quality, so hopefully this report will encourage improvement in that area in addition to the enrollment/completion area.
This meeting was a chance for the EPDC to get feedback on the draft report from representatives from various aid organizations. It was very interesting to listen to their comments about how this report would be received--how to not piss off ministers of education in the "slow" countries, how to not make donors feel like contributing money is worthless if countries are following predictable trends anyway, how to highlight the lessons offered by "fast" countries, etc. Overall they were very excited about the data being presented, and said it was very different than the other information available (this made me feel proud, even though my only contribution has been to turn the numbers into graphs. I guess I'm proud of the EPDC, which I feel like I'm a part of). It was also cool to hear these people talk about the politics of presenting the data. They were realistic and frank without being cynical, and I've found that that kind of balance is hard to come by. I loved it.
One minor annoyance about the meeting though... we all introduced ourselves at the beginning, and I just said I was interning with the EPDC for the summer, but George made a point of prompting me to say that I was studying engineering. Everyone seems to find this very amusing. Two of the women came up to me when we were having lunch and asked me questions, trying to figure out why on earth and engineer would be interested in, like, education and saving the world. Do engineers really have such a callous reputation?
I don't think I've ever really clearly explained what I'm working on this summer, partly because I didn't have a good understanding of it myself. But after this meeting, I think I can give it a shot. The EPDC (Education Policy and Data Center, which is my group) is preparing a report that will analyze many different indicators (enrollment rates, completion rates, gender gap, urban/rural gap, literacy rates, etc) to determine how well countries are progressing towards EFA (Education For All). The EPDC is looking for patterns and trends so that they can say, for example, that if Mali receives no intervention, it will reach a 95% primary school enrollment rate by around 2075. There are already some interesing correlations that have come out of the data. For example, classroom size has no correlation with quality of education, but student:teacher ratio does; once it gets above 50:1, all other indicators of learning quality completely stagnate. This is of interest, because it suggests that instead of spending money to build more schools, donors should focus on educating teachers (ratios of 140:1 in primary schools are not uncommon in many countries right now). The report will be used by education ministries within countries to diagnose problem areas, and will also be used by potential donors to determine how their money would be best spent.
[the following may be somewhat disjointed paragraphs, since I'm just trying to record my impressions from the meeting]
Of course there are lots of reports on the status of education in various countries, but (as I understand it) this report will be unique because it is based on household surveys rather than adminstrative data. So rather than relying on the school principal to report enrollment rates, independent NGOs go door to door and ask about the education history of each person in the household. This is good for many reasons, but I personally think it's cool that from one year's survey, you can get a picture of what education has been like for the last 60 or so years. If you find out that 37% of the 40-year-olds in Nigeria are literate (can read a sentence presented by the interviewer), then you can with reasonable accuracy say that that reflects the educational system that existed 25 years ago, when those 40-year-olds were finishing primary school.
Since the early nineties, there has been a big push for EFA, but unfortunately countries are feeling pressure to boost enrollment rates, and this sometimes comes at the expense of actually improving the quality of the education. For example, in Egypt, 95% of children complete 5th grade, but only 21% can read a sentence. When completing primary school doesn't even confer basic literacy, the whole concept of UPE (universal primary education) loses all value. The data that the EPDC is presenting shows very clearly the deficits in education quality, so hopefully this report will encourage improvement in that area in addition to the enrollment/completion area.
This meeting was a chance for the EPDC to get feedback on the draft report from representatives from various aid organizations. It was very interesting to listen to their comments about how this report would be received--how to not piss off ministers of education in the "slow" countries, how to not make donors feel like contributing money is worthless if countries are following predictable trends anyway, how to highlight the lessons offered by "fast" countries, etc. Overall they were very excited about the data being presented, and said it was very different than the other information available (this made me feel proud, even though my only contribution has been to turn the numbers into graphs. I guess I'm proud of the EPDC, which I feel like I'm a part of). It was also cool to hear these people talk about the politics of presenting the data. They were realistic and frank without being cynical, and I've found that that kind of balance is hard to come by. I loved it.
One minor annoyance about the meeting though... we all introduced ourselves at the beginning, and I just said I was interning with the EPDC for the summer, but George made a point of prompting me to say that I was studying engineering. Everyone seems to find this very amusing. Two of the women came up to me when we were having lunch and asked me questions, trying to figure out why on earth and engineer would be interested in, like, education and saving the world. Do engineers really have such a callous reputation?
Comments