|
CONTENTS
 Introduction
- The EFA vision and a region in transition
I.Economic
change and mobilising resources for education
Slow
and uneven economic recovery
Public spending on education
Household welfare and private resources for education
II. Assessing
trends in education since 1990
Trends
in access to education
Implications
for educational quality
Implications
for equity in education
Groups
disadvantaged in access to education
III.Policy
priorities beyond EFA 2000
Maintaining
educational reform under fiscal constraints
Improving the quality and relevance of education
Appendix
References
III. Policy priorities beyond EFA 2000
This
section surveys some of the policy priorities that will help
to promote the vision of Education for All beyond the year
2000. As noted in all of the EFA 2000 National Reports, in
spite of the difficulties associated with the transition process,
countries have taken many concrete steps towards education
reform. These reforms have focused on the areas of education
legislation, democratisation of curricula and decentralisation
of governance and finance. However in some countries, the
actual implementation of these reforms have been slow and
often difficult. This section focuses on two areas that should
be considered to ensure that the Education for All vision
is maintained into the next decade: maintaining educational
reform under fiscal constraints and improving the quality
and relevance of education.
Maintaining
educational reform under fiscal constraints
In
light of fiscal constraints, can countries be expected to
maintain the commitment to quality education and institutional
reforms? There are several reasons to suggest that the present
offers certain opportunities. First, there is a window of
opportunity in terms of lower fertility, fewer children and
lessened demand on the system. Second, spending cuts made
now may result in much higher social costs in the near future.
Third, for some countries, the influence of European integration
on political will may provide added leverage for change.
Table
1 shows that the sharp decline in birth-rates that has reduced
education demand among younger age cohorts quite substantially.
Changes in population size and structure have an important
influence on the future demands faced by educational systems
across the region. These changes create both opportunities:
smaller age cohorts mean per pupil expenditures can more easily
be maintained; and challenges: growing age cohorts place greater
demand on systems already strapped for cash. This provides
an important rationale for consolidating large-scale reform.
In the medium term, these opportunity will soon become a challenge,
i.e., the need to strengthen the knowledge and skills of a
shrinking labour force that will be increasingly in competition
with European Union markets.
Table 1. Number of children by age in Central and Eastern
Europe, 1990 and 1998
(mid-year
population, in millions)
|
1990 |
1998 |
Index (1990=100) |
|
Total |
95.0 |
81.2 |
85.5 |
|
0-2 years |
14.5 |
8.3 |
57.2 |
|
3-6 years |
20.9 |
13.0 |
62.2 |
|
7-14 years |
40.3 |
39.7 |
98.5 |
|
15-18 years |
19.3 |
20.2 |
104.7 |
Source:
MONEE project database, UNICEF – ICDCNotes: Age breakdowns
not available for Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia,FYR
Macedonia, and Turkey.
It
is important to maintain educational access and quality because
the lack of investment in education denies access to those
in greatest need of its benefits. Thus, creating a vicious
circle where poverty begets low educational achievement and
low educational achievement begets rising unemployment and
poverty. Investment in education is one way to minimise these
risks, risks, which would result in greater human and social
costs in the future. The educational system, alongside other
institutions, plays an important role in evening out disparities.
Governments
need to reassess the levels of public expenditures and how
they are being distributed, but also monitor how well that
money is being spent. They must judge whether the poor are
excluded from educational opportunities and whether poor regions
or neighbourhoods have the available resources to meet the
needs of local schools. Clearly, the low levels of funding
going to buildings, equipment and teacher wages is unsustainable
and threatens the efficacy of educational systems. And while
the goal of decentralisation is to make local governments
more responsible for and more responsive to local educational
needs, central governments still have the responsibility to
ensure that sufficient resources reach the areas that are
in the greatest need.
But
increasing financial resources alone would probably not be
enough. Parents and communities have to become more involved.
Thus, serving as a possible defence against the impact of
weak state funding and institutional inertia. Parents can
be encouraged to organise groups that develop after-school
activities and help restore other aspects of the social support
once provided by schools. They can also play a role in monitoring
the quality of schooling, which can stimulate better learning
outcomes. Getting parents involved in school life may also
help ensure that children from disadvantaged backgrounds are
enrolled in school.
Improving
the quality and relevance of education
It
should first be recognised that enabling young people and
adults begins with the young child. Thus, learning begins
in kindergarten and through primary school, where cognitive
skills are developed. Public policy on early childhood development
should consider alternatives to state-run formal kindergartens,
such as informal community programmes and parental education.
Innovative programmes have, for example, been launched in
Croatia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina to promote home-based early
child development. Additionally, efforts have been made to
introduce active teaching and learning methods, particularly
in Croatia (Croatia, 1999) and to support access to low-income
families (Bulgaria, 1999).
Education
policies should address needs among youth and adults, but
efforts should begin by enabling young children – providing
them with a sound foundation in academic and functional skills
that promotes life-long learning and mediates the risks of
marginalisation at older ages. Young people also acquire civic
skills in schools and participation in the educational process
is essential to developing this aspect. The educational system
should work with social partners, such as parents and communities,
to promote meaningful participation.
Extensive
curricular reform is underway, including the promoting further
active learning and teaching methodologies, the introduction
of new subjects and new textbooks and other learning materials.
There is a need for curricula that help to promote ethnic
tolerance and civil values in a number of countries. And with
the changes in curricula, revised examination methods to ensure
selection according to merit should be the rule. Slovenia
has already made important reforms in this area, while others,
such as Poland (Poland, 1999) and Romania (Romania, 1999)
are expected to follow suit.
To
promote the inclusion of children from national minorities
in education, the language of instruction is an important
factor and is an issue that was noted in a number of national
reports. It is important to allow ethnic minorities to take
part in the running of the local school system. There have
been a number of initiatives to better integrate children
with disabilities into mainstream schools, particularly in
Slovakia (Slovakia, 1999) and Latvia (Latvia, 1999) but slower
progress in other countries. Policies to address the needs
of these children are often difficult to formulate due to
the limited amount of information.
Educational
and training systems should be flexible in order to facilitate
educational aspirations and opportunities for life-long learning.
This is an important step to minimising the long-term effects
of exclusion from education. It means more diverse educational
pathways and more flexible training systems, especially those
that are able to cater more to the needs of specific regions,
communities and individuals. For example, to help young mothers
(teen fertility rates are up to ten times than those in Western
Europe) in balancing education and childcare; to help facilitate
learning among youth who are working part-time, or an even
larger segment that are working full-time and are students;
to help rural youth, often at a disadvantage in continuing
education because of the lower quality education in rural
schools; to help those who merit continuing education, but
are unable to meet the costs of attending an elite gymnazium,
technical institute or university.
The
demands on education in Central and Eastern Europe have increased
markedly during the 1990s, just as resources were drastically
reduced. Nevertheless, the next decade provides even greater
challenges – the debate over future directions and the wider
implementation of reforms will touch upon every part of the
educational system and will play a central role in the rebuilding
of nations, economies and societies.
APPENDIX: STRUCTURE OF EDUCATIONAL SYSTEMS, 1996
|
|
Compulsory ages
|
No. of years
|
ECD
|
Primary
|
Lower
Secondary
|
Upper secondary
|
|
|
|
|
|
ISCED0
|
ISCED1
|
ISCED2
|
ISCED3
|
ISCED 4
|
ISCED5
|
|
Czech Republic
|
6-14
|
9
|
3-5
|
6-10
|
11-14
|
15-18
|
…
|
19-23
|
|
Slovakia
|
6-14
|
9
|
3-5
|
6-9
|
10-14
|
15-18
|
…
|
19-23
|
|
Poland
|
7-14
|
8
|
3-6
|
7-14
|
…
|
15-18
|
…
|
19-24
|
|
Hungary
|
6-15
|
10
|
3-5
|
6-9
|
10-13
|
14-17
|
18-20
|
18-23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slovenia
|
6-14
|
9
|
3-5
|
6-10
|
11-14
|
15-18
|
…
|
19-25
|
|
Croatia
|
7-14
|
8
|
3-6
|
7-10
|
11-14
|
15-18
|
…
|
19-24
|
|
FYR Macedonia
|
7-14
|
8
|
3-6
|
7-10
|
11-14
|
15-18
|
17-18
|
19-25
|
|
Bosnia-Herzegovina
|
7-14
|
8
|
3-6
|
7-10
|
11-14
|
15-18
|
…
|
19-24
|
|
FR Yugoslavia
|
7-14
|
8
|
3-6
|
7-10
|
11-14
|
15-18
|
…
|
19-24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Albania
|
6-13
|
8
|
3-5
|
6-9
|
10-13
|
14-17
|
…
|
18-23
|
|
Bulgaria
|
7-14
|
8
|
3-6
|
7-10
|
11-14
|
15-18
|
18-19
|
19-23
|
|
Romania
|
7-14
|
8
|
3-6
|
7-10
|
11-14
|
15-18
|
19-21
|
19-24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estonia
|
7-15
|
9
|
3-6
|
7-12
|
13-15
|
16-18
|
19-20
|
19-24
|
|
Latvia
|
7-15
|
9
|
3-6
|
7-10
|
11-15
|
16-18
|
19-20
|
19-24
|
|
Lithuania
|
7-15
|
9
|
3-6
|
7-10
|
11-15
|
16-18
|
19-20
|
19-24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Belarus
|
6-14
|
9
|
3-5
|
6-9
|
10-14
|
15-16
|
17-19
|
17-22
|
|
Moldova
|
7-15
|
9
|
3-6
|
7-10
|
11-15
|
16-17
|
17-18
|
18-23
|
|
Russia
|
7-15
|
9
|
3-6
|
7-10
|
11-15
|
16-17
|
17-18
|
18-23
|
|
Ukraine
|
7-15
|
9
|
3-6
|
7-10
|
11-15
|
16-17
|
17-19
|
18-23
|
Note:
Based on ISCED 1997, except for Croatia, FR Yugoslavia, Belarus,
Moldova, Russia and Ukraine, which are based on ISCED 1976
REFERENCES
A.
EFA 2000 NATIONAL REPORTS
Belarus
(1999)
Ministry
of Education of the Republic of Belarus/Belorussian State
University/
National
Institute for Higher Education
Basic
Education in Belarus: National Report of the Republic of Belarus
National
coordinator: Sergei Vetokhin
Authors:
S. Vetokhin and V. Stepanov
Bosnia-Herzegovina
(1999)
Federal
Republic National coordinator: Ramiz Selimovic
Authors:
Balkovic Vlatka, Fako Atija, Ganibegovic Maida, Jabucar Abdulah,
Merlo Mira, Nalo Jasminka, Pandzo-Hasanbegovic Emina, Radic
Nadezda, Saracevic Azra, Smajic Adaleta, Suljagic Mensur,
Topuz Hanefija, Vesnic Smail, Alic Hajrudin and Hadziefendic
Enes.
Bulgaria
(1999)
Ministry
Of Education And Science/National Institute For Education/Republic
Of Bulgaria
Education
For All: The Year 2000 Assessment
National
coordinator: Dr. Violeta Mircheva
Authors:
Stoianka Daskalova, Kalina Madjirova, Violeta Mirtcheva, Maria
Makedonska, Petia Asenova, Iordanka Fakirska, Iotchka Anastasowa
and Dimitar Peevski.
Consultants:
Stanio Stanev, Ivan Ivanov
Editors:
Elka Nikolova, Stanimira Morfova
Croatia
(1999)
Croatian
Institute for Promotion of Schooling
National
coordinator: Misela Bras-car
FYR
Macedonia (1999)
Ministry
of Education
Education
for All – Report 2000
National
coordinator: Marija TaÓ eva
Project
coordinator: Simeonka Gu… eva
Authors:
Simeonka Gu… eva, Ljiljana Samardñ iska-Panova,
Kiro Poposki,
Gjorgi
Andreevski, Divna Lakinska, Gorica Mickovska, TaÓ e Stojanovski,
Gjorgi
Kosev, Nevena Pa… emska, Marijana Vardñ iska, Sokrat
Panovski, Marija Kitanova
Latvia
(1999)
Department
Of Education Strategy
Ministry
Of Education And Science
Education
For All: The Year 2000 Assessment
National
coordinator: Antra Mazura
Lithuania
(1999)
Ministry
Of Education And Science Of Lithuania
Institute
of Pedagogics Education For All 2000: The Year 2000 Assessment
National
coordinator: Mr. Arunas Pliksnys
Republic
of Moldova (1999)
Ministry
Of Education And Science
National
Report: Education For All – 2000
National
coordinator: Mihai Paiu
Poland
(1999)
Ministry
of National Education
Education
For All: The Year 2000 Assessment
National
coordinator: Krzysztof Kafel
Authors:
Andrzej Bogaj, Krzysztof Kafel, Stefan M. Kwiatkowski, Rafał
Piwowarski
The EFA
indicators calculated by: Alina Baran, Lucyna Nowak, Stanisław
Radkowski
Romania
(1999)
Ministry
of National Education – Institute for Sciences of Education
Romania:
Education for All
National
coordinator: Cezar Birzea
Authors:Florentina
Anghel, Magdalena Balica, Mircea Bădescu, Irina Boca,
Romulus
Brâncoveanu, Diana Ghinea, Rodica Hriţac, Mihaela Jigău,
Andrei Novak,
Cornelia
Novak, Viorica Pop.
Russia
(1999)
International
Consultative Forum on Education For All – Russia
Education
for All: Assessment 2000
National
coordinators: A.M. Kondakov and A.V. Talonov
Authors:
A.Ya. Savel’iev, I.G. Kukhtina, V.M. Zouev, V.K. Zaretskiy
Technical
group: V.B. Lidova, T.L. Ivanova, Yu.I. Kuftyrev, V.N. Samorukova
Slovakia
(1999)
Education
for All in the Slovak Republic: Country report
Author:
Ľudmila Šimčáková et al.
Working
team: Ministry of Education, Institute of Information and
Prognoses in
Education,
National Institute for Education, Research Institute of Child
Psychology
and Pathopsychology, Slovak Pedagogic Library, Ministry of
Health,
Ministry
of Culture and Ministry of Environment.
Turkey
(1999)
Ministry
of National Education
Education
for All: Year 2000 Assessment
Technical
commission: Fikri Üst, Mehmet Sever, Aysel Sezer, Rahmi
Selenay,
Esin
Fenercioglu, Seref Dilmen, Emel Saral, Fatma Nurhan Baykal
High commission:
Assoc. Dr. Ata Tezbasaran, Kamil Zengin, Aydin Parlak,
Nahide
Yilmaz, Osman Akkus
Ukraine
(1999)
Ministry
Of Education Of Ukraine
Education
for All: 2000 Assessment
National
coordinator: Yevhen Polischuk
Working
group: K.Korsak, G.Stepenko, O.Lokshyna, R.Remizova, V.Vysotska
Contributors:
M.Fomenko, L.Uschenko, V.Vorobiov, V.Pokas, D.Bachev,
G.Naumenko,
Y.Zavalevsky
B.
OTHER SOURCES
Barrow,
Michael (1997) "Structure, Governance and Finance of
Education in Central Europe," Florence: UNICEF International
Child Development Centre. Mimeo.
Beaton,
A.E, I.V.S. Mullis, M.O. Martin, E.J. Gonzalez, D.L. Kelly,
and T.A. Smith (1996), Mathematics Achievement in the Middle
School Years: IEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science
Study. Chestnut Hill, MA: Centre for the Study of Testing,
Evaluation and Educational Policy, Boston College.
Cusan,
Alessandra and Albert Motivans (1997), "Education in
Transition: Trends In Finance, Access and Quality," Florence:
UNICEF International Child Development Centre. Mimeo.
EBRD
(1999), Transition Report 1999: London: EBRD.
EFA Forum
(1996), Education for All: Achieving the Goal. Paris: UNESCO.
Klugman,
Jeni (1997), Education and Equity in the Former Soviet Republics:
Disruption and Opportunities in Financing and Governance,
Florence: UNICEF International Child Development Centre. Mimeo.
Micklwright,
John (1999), "Education, Inequality and Transition"
Economics of Transition, Vol. 7:2.
NIPERC
(1996), The Quality of Education and Local Educational
Administration in Hungary: Final Report. Budapest: National
Institute of Public Education Research Centre.
UNICEF
(1998), Education for All? Regional Monitoring Report,
No. 5, Florence: UNICEF International Child Development Centre.
UNICEF
(1999a), After the Fall: the Human Impact of Ten Years
of Transition, Florence: UNICEF International Child Development
Centre.
UNICEF
(1999b), Situation Report on Education in the Federal Republic
of Yugoslavia. Mimeo.
UNICEF
(1999c), Women in Transition, Regional Monitoring Report,
No. 6, Florence: UNICEF International Child Development Centre.
Vari,
Peter, ed. (1997), Are We Similar in Math and Science? A Study
of Grade 8 in Nine Central and Eastern European Countries,
IEA.
|
