Orientation Education Brazil Nml

484 views
423 views

Published on

Orientation Education Brazil Nml

Published in: Education, Career
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
484
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Low income = public school = private universities High income = private school = public universities
  • Low income = public school = private universities High income = private school = public universities
  • http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001846/184682por.pdf
  • 10 problems http://revistaescola.abril.com.br/pdf/especial-gestao-bx.pdf 1) 2) There’s a figure called “pedagocal orientator” 3) Teachers training. Case: Aracruz 6) Floor and rof / School Board 7) Much harder when it’s State, so much harder for high school. Essencial for monitoting, evaluating and making public policies last ==> PROBLEM: political jobs 8) Again, the problem is political. Ideal: technical + comunity
  • Orientation Education Brazil Nml

    1. 2. SOME RECURRENT CONCERNS
    2. 3. Concerns Socioeconomic situation drop out rate age gap quality of education education = better life? education = + equality? education = economic growth? Influence of income filling the gaps finding the gaps private X public university X technical more infra-strucuture X better paid teachers descontinuity of public policies civic society engagement
    3. 4. OVERVIEW
    4. 5. Overview: structure <ul><li>Fundamental 1 - city government </li></ul><ul><li>Fundamental 2 - city government </li></ul><ul><li>High School - state government </li></ul><ul><li>“ Normal”: 4th year of high school </li></ul><ul><li>Technical programs (public and private) </li></ul><ul><li>Universities (public and private) </li></ul>
    5. 6. Overview: years of education
    6. 7. Overview: years of education by Region
    7. 8. Overview: attendance and income Illustrates the fact that the rate of absence of children at school is connected to the income bracket of their family. It can be seen that between 7 and 14 years of age the data confirms presence at school, whilst between the ages of 15 and 17 the situation changes with a significant contingent still being out of education.
    8. 9. Overview: public X private <ul><li>Concentration of enrollments in primary education (88%), and secondary education (80%) in the public system </li></ul><ul><li>In higher education this proportion is inverted with around 70% of the enrollments being in the private sector. </li></ul>
    9. 10. Overview: public X private ENEM: In 2008, the average performance of students from private schools was of 56.12%, while the average performance of students from public schools was of 37.27%
    10. 11. NUMBERS <ul><li>Indicators </li></ul>
    11. 12. Numbers <ul><li>PISA </li></ul><ul><li>Ranks 54º in MATH (among 57 countries) </li></ul><ul><li>Ranks 49º in READING (among 56 countries) </li></ul><ul><li>39,5% of 16 yrs-old haven’t finished fundamental school </li></ul><ul><li>55,1% of 19 yrs-old couldn’t finish high school </li></ul><ul><li>74% of the population can’t understand a simple text (Inaf) </li></ul><ul><li>42,6% high school seniors are above the adequate age average </li></ul>
    12. 13. Numbers <ul><li>PISA 2006: Brazil and others BRIC’s </li></ul><ul><li>61% of the students examined in Brazil are below Level 2 in the scale of proficiency in sciences (1 - 6) </li></ul><ul><li>20% in Russia are below Level 2 </li></ul><ul><li>8.7% in China are below Level 2 </li></ul>
    13. 14. IDEB <ul><li>Index of Basic Education Development </li></ul><ul><li>From 0 to 10 </li></ul><ul><li>Average 1st to 5th grade: 4,2 </li></ul><ul><li>Average 6th to 9th grade: 3,8 </li></ul><ul><li>Average high school: 3,5 </li></ul><ul><li>Average Rio’s public high schools: 2,8 </li></ul><ul><li>Average Brazil’s private high schools: 5,6 </li></ul>
    14. 15. TEACHERS <ul><li>Profile </li></ul>
    15. 16. The Teachers <ul><li>67% women (in high school) </li></ul><ul><li>32% non-whit </li></ul><ul><li>54% catholic (less than av. Pop.) and 16% evangelic </li></ul><ul><li>30% are 46+ years old </li></ul><ul><li>25% has 2 + jobs </li></ul><ul><li>90% are satisfeid with their teaching </li></ul><ul><li>63% feel stressed </li></ul><ul><li>25% have burn out syndrome </li></ul><ul><li>21% are satisfied with the profession </li></ul><ul><li>50% have salaries below R$ 720 ($ 420) </li></ul>
    16. 17. The teachers’ view <ul><li>WHO’S TO BLAME? </li></ul><ul><li>77%: parents are not present </li></ul><ul><li>70%: student’s are not motivated </li></ul><ul><li>69%: lack of discipline and attention </li></ul><ul><li>State is only mentioned as employer </li></ul>
    17. 18. The teachers’ view <ul><li>PUBLIC X PRIVATE </li></ul><ul><li>72%: teacher’s in public schools are social assistents </li></ul><ul><li>38%: “Teachers don’t teach, help survive” </li></ul><ul><li>64%: socioeconomic situation influences learning (in public for worst, in private for better) </li></ul><ul><li>Most has taken training courses, but don’t feel better prepared </li></ul>
    18. 19. The specialists’ view <ul><li>More kids in school = youth from former excluded groups = difficult bg = schools and teachers haven’t reviewed their missions and responsabilities </li></ul><ul><li>TEACHERS FEEL POWERLESS AND GIVE UP </li></ul><ul><li>School is not seen as public agent and as an institution </li></ul><ul><li>Carrer of oublic school teacher is obscure and unattractive (low salary, violence, </li></ul>
    19. 20. STUDENTS <ul><li>Profile </li></ul>
    20. 21. PRINCIPALS <ul><li>Profile </li></ul>
    21. 22. Principals <ul><li>98% don’t feel responsible for the school’s low rates </li></ul><ul><li>90% spend more time checking food suply than in class </li></ul><ul><li>64% don’t feel ready for the task </li></ul><ul><li>36% don’t even know the schools performance in oficial tests </li></ul><ul><li>50% don’t go to weekly pedagogical meetings </li></ul>
    22. 23. Principals <ul><li>80% are women </li></ul><ul><li>Average 46 years old </li></ul><ul><li>86% come from classes A and B </li></ul><ul><li>43% are pedagogy graduates, 16% are literature graduates ==> former teachers </li></ul><ul><li>21% were nominated by politicians </li></ul><ul><li>50% are in the current school for less than 2 years </li></ul>
    23. 24. Who’s to blame?
    24. 25. Principals: best practices study <ul><li>Management quality </li></ul><ul><li>Integrated vision </li></ul><ul><li>Organizational atmosphere </li></ul><ul><li>Attention to the goal: know the performance, stablish meta, make team plan </li></ul>
    25. 26. ISSUES <ul><li>10 </li></ul>
    26. 27. 10 pressing issues <ul><li>Management preparation </li></ul><ul><li>Definition of roles and responsabilities </li></ul><ul><li>HTPC: Time for colective pedacogical work = fiction? </li></ul><ul><li>Internal system evaluation </li></ul><ul><li>Attention to external evaluation (IDEB, Prova Brasil) </li></ul><ul><li>Autonomy + training + acompanhamento + cobrança </li></ul><ul><li>Proximity between schools and D of E </li></ul><ul><li>How principals are chosen </li></ul><ul><li>New teachers + old teachers = diversity </li></ul><ul><li>Continuity of management staff </li></ul>
    27. 28. PRO UNI <ul><li>Looking for equality </li></ul>
    28. 29. QUOTE SYSTEM <ul><li>Looking for equality </li></ul>
    29. 30. INNOVATIVE HIGH SCHOOL <ul><li>Future </li></ul>

    ×