Recoup Theme 3 Presentation Oct 08

1,144 views
1,098 views

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,144
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Recoup Theme 3 Presentation Oct 08

  1. 1. RECOUP Theme 3: Partnerships and Outcomes
  2. 2. Public-Private Partnerships Using an expanded exit-voice-loyalty framework <ul><li>exit relates to the decision to leave a provider on account of dissatisfaction while voice is used to denote activity by an individual while remaining within an organisation to ensure the continued provision of a good. </li></ul><ul><li>If exit indicates choice in a market context while voice indicates political responsiveness then we have two important tools to understand the relationship between consumers, the school and the providers </li></ul><ul><li>The degree of loyalty to a school affects the manner and extent to which both exit and voice work through </li></ul><ul><ul><li>the self-identification of individuals with the provider </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>the brand image created by the provider. </li></ul></ul>
  3. 3. What are the educational outcomes? <ul><li>Where exit occurs it indicates negative choice by the consumer with regard to the quality of education that is being provided </li></ul><ul><li>The exercise of voice by parents and pupils is witnessed by various forms of political activity (ranging from complaints to campaigns) to obtain a higher quality and wider coverage of education </li></ul><ul><li>the demand for education is a combination of exit and voice taking full account of the extent of loyalty that the individual had towards the educational provider. </li></ul><ul><li>The supply response can be ascertained in the financial and non-financial changes that an educational provider makes in relation to changing enrolment and parental actions. </li></ul><ul><li>A central question concerns whether or not these different outcomes are associated with particular school types, and if so, why </li></ul>
  4. 4. Outputs <ul><li>Site selection and training complete in Pakistan. Field study begun. </li></ul><ul><li>Fennell, S., 2007. ‘Educating the Poor: Deceptions of private schooling’, paper presented at VIII International Conference on Asian Youth and Childhoods, International Sociological Association (ISA) in Lucknow (India) from November 22nd to 24th, 2007. </li></ul><ul><li>Fennell, S., 2008. ‘Decentralisation and the Implications for Indian Education’, draft, Presented paper at British South Asian Studies on 26-28th April 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>Fennell, S, 2008. ‘Contested Gender Frameworks: Economic Models and Provider Perspectives on Education’, in Fennell, S. and M. Arnot, 2008. ed., Gender Education & Equality in a Global Context: Conceptual Frameworks and Policy Perspectives . Routledge. </li></ul>
  5. 5. Student Learning Outcomes in Public and Private Schools Does higher teacher pay raise student achievement in both? <ul><li>Output: Does performance related pay for teachers improve student achievement? Kingdon & Teal, Economics of Education Review, 2007 </li></ul><ul><li>Uses student/school survey data from India; finds : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>in private schools </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>teacher pay is related to student achievement (there’s an element of performance related pay), and </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>performance related pay raises student achievement (after controlling pupil ability, home background) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>In government schools </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>There is little dispersion of teacher pay </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>pay is not related to student achievement (in a T pay equation, student ach. Is insignificant) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>pay is also not a significant determinant of student achievement </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Conclusion: Findings suggest that higher pay is an effort-motivating device only when the threat of dismissal is credible (which it is not in govt. schools in India where teachers have a job for life). Thus the findings support efficiency wage theory. </li></ul>
  6. 6. How do teacher characteristics affect student achievement in private and public schools? <ul><li>Output: Aslam, M. and G. Kingdon. ‘What can Teachers do to Raise Pupil Achievement?’, RECOUP Working Paper #19, University of Cambridge, 2008. </li></ul><ul><li>Student achievement in Pakistan is improved much more by process variables (time on different tasks in class) than by their own qualifications, training, experience etc </li></ul><ul><li>Yet, teacher reward structures are based mainly on qualifications, training, experience </li></ul><ul><li>Suggests ways to improve student achievement  </li></ul><ul><li>Output: Kingdon, G. and F. Teal. “Teacher unions, teacher pay and student achievement in India”, IOE mimeo, Sept 2008. Under review at Journal of Development Economics </li></ul><ul><li>Uses data on a sample of 180 Indian private schools </li></ul><ul><li>Regresses the difference in student score across subjects on the difference in the characteristics of teachers that teach those subjects </li></ul><ul><li>Finds that union membership of teacher reduces student achievement, also raises costs </li></ul>
  7. 7. Private & public schooling and the effect of class size <ul><li>Output: Kingdon. G. “Private and Public Schooling: The Indian Experience”, Forthcoming Chakrabarti, R. and P. Peterson (eds.) School Choice International , MIT Press </li></ul><ul><li>The general progress of school education in India is assessed </li></ul><ul><li>inter alia , examines the role and growth of private schooling, surveying evidence on the relative effectiveness and unit costs of private and public schools. </li></ul><ul><li>Output: Altinok, N. and G. Kingdon. “New Evidence on Class Size Effects: A Pupil Fixed Effects Approach”, mimeo, Institute of Education, May 2008. </li></ul><ul><li>The effectiveness of reductions in class size, as a means of improving student learning, remains an unresolved question for policy-makers.  </li></ul><ul><li>In this cross-country study using TIMSS data (on 45 countries), class size emerges as a significant predictor of achievement in many countries; But the effects are small.  </li></ul><ul><li>Authors conclude that class-size reductions do not seem to present a cost-effective strategy for raising student achievement levels </li></ul>
  8. 8. Outputs <ul><li>On student learning outcomes in private and public schools </li></ul><ul><li>Kingdon. G. “Private and Public Schooling: The Indian Experience”, Forthcoming Chakrabarti, R. and P. Peterson (eds.) School Choice International , MIT Press </li></ul><ul><li>Kingdon, G. and F. Teal. “Does Performance Related Pay for Teachers Improve Student Achievement? Some Evidence from India”, Economics of Education Review . 26, No. 4: 473-86. August 2007. </li></ul><ul><li>Aslam, M. and G. Kingdon. ‘What can Teachers do to Raise Pupil Achievement?’, RECOUP Working Paper #19, University of Cambridge, 2008. </li></ul><ul><li>Altinok, N. and G. Kingdon. “New Evidence on Class Size Effects: A Pupil Fixed Effects Approach”, mimeo, Institute of Education, May 2008. </li></ul><ul><li>Kingdon, G. and F. Teal. “Teacher unions, teacher pay and student achievement in India”, mimeo, Institute of Education, September 2008. Under review at JHR </li></ul>
  9. 9. Aid partnerships <ul><li>Main research question: What has been the impact of aid on education policy and outcomes in partner countries? </li></ul><ul><li>Country papers on educational expenditures and financing in the four countries (two published, two in penultimate draft form) </li></ul><ul><li>Only limited evidence for direct relationship between increased expenditures and increased access to education </li></ul><ul><li>Only limited evidence at macro level on the impact of aid on educational outcomes </li></ul>
  10. 10. Mixed Methods studies <ul><li>Interviews amongst international aid community informed short framework paper </li></ul><ul><li>Interviews amongst the aid community in four partner states </li></ul><ul><li>First round of interviews completed in Pakistan, India and Ghana </li></ul><ul><li>Further interviews amongst domestic policy-makers to be conducted </li></ul><ul><li>Quantitative data on aid trends, sources and modalities to be integrated </li></ul><ul><li>In India, evidence of strong policy ownership, mirroring the priorities of the MDGs. Aid large in absolute terms, but small relative to total education expenditures. Complex issues for policy arise as Indian growth continues. </li></ul><ul><li>Paper in preparation for India December Conference </li></ul><ul><li>Paper in preparation for Ghana March 09 Conference </li></ul><ul><li>Pakistan paper to be ready for Oxcon 2009 </li></ul><ul><li>Kenya fieldwork to begin November 08 </li></ul>
  11. 11. Outputs <ul><ul><li>Articles and Book Chapters </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Colclough, C. (2007). Aid Agency Support for Education: Gaps between Intention and Action. Southern African Review of Education , 13(2), 27-39. </li></ul><ul><li>Colclough, C. (2008). Global gender goals and the construction of equality: conceptual dilemmas and policy practice. In Fennell, S. and Arnot, M. (eds), Gender Education and Equality in a Global Context: conceptual frameworks and policy perspectives (pp. 51-66). London: Routledge. Also issued as RECOUP Working Paper No 2, Cambridge </li></ul><ul><li>RECOUP Working Paper series </li></ul><ul><li>De, A. & Endow, T. (2008). Public expenditure on education in India: Recent trends and outcomes . (RECOUP Working Paper 18). Cambridge: Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge. </li></ul><ul><li>Thompson, N.M. & Casely-Hayford, L. (2008). The financing and outcomes of education in Ghana . (RECOUP Working Paper 16). Cambridge: Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge. </li></ul><ul><li>Malik, R. (2007). Aid Effectiveness and the Role of Donor Intervention in the Education Sector in Pakistan – a Review of Issues and Literature . RECOUP Working Paper No. 6, University of Cambridge </li></ul><ul><li>Other papers </li></ul><ul><li>King, K., and R. Malik, (2008) ‘ Donor coordination in an uncoordinated development environment: the case of education in Pakistan’ (mimeo) . </li></ul><ul><li>Casely-Hayford, L & Palmer, R with Ayamdoo and Thompson (2007) ‘ aid and donor partnerships’ in Ghana’s education sector, 1987-2007: a critical review of the literature and progress . Mimeo. Accra, Ghana: Associates for Change. </li></ul><ul><li>King, K. and Casely-Hayford, L. (2008). Aid partnerships in Ghana: the impact of the new aid architecture . Mimeo. Accra, Ghana: Associates for Change (mimeo). </li></ul><ul><li>Otieno, W., ( 2008) The Role and Importance of Aid to the Education sector in Kenya (draft mimeo), Septembe r. </li></ul>

×