Does growth in private schooling contribute to Education for All? Evidence from a longitudinal, two cohort study in Andhra Pradesh, India

Woodhead, Martin; Frost, Melanie; James, Zoe

doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2012.02.005

Cited by 129 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(28 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even some of the poorest urban families (and increasing numbers of rural families) are 'voting with their feet' in favour of private schools, pointing to a crisis in the public-sector school system, which is failing to meet parental expectations on quality and accountability, despite teachers being better qualified and a great deal better paid than their private-school counterparts. While some argue that the low-fee private sector offers an important alternative for these families, and can contribute to Education For All goals (for example where poor children received subsidized places), there are major risks to equity, unless and until major government reforms are able to regulate private schools and/or public sector schools are reformed (Woodhead, Frost and James, 2013). Whilst evidence from Andhra Pradesh suggests private school pupils score higher in tests than government pupils, much of the performance differences are down to different pupil backgrounds, not the action of the school.…”

Section: Impact Of the Private Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

What Inequality means for Children

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding how poverty and inequalities impact on children is the major goal of Young Lives, a unique longitudinal, mixed-methods study. Two cohorts totaling 12,000 children are being tracked since 2001, growing-up in Ethiopia, the state of Andhra Pradesh (AP) India, Peru and Vietnam. Earlier versions of this paper were prepared as Young Lives contribution to a UNICEF/UN Women consultation on the post-2015 Development agenda, (www.worldwewant2015.org/inequalities) and published as Woodhead, Dornan and Murray (2013).

show abstract

Section: Impact Of the Private Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

What Inequality means for Children

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reasons identified for this include teachers and students not sharing a language (Ansah, 2014;Ansah and Agyeman, 2015;IEQ, 2000 for Ghana; D'Souza, 2006 for India); school communities being diverse and students not sharing a language, particularly in urban contexts (Mfum-Mensah, 2005 for Ghana; Jhingran, 2009 for India); or there being a mismatch between the state language which serves as the MOI in government primary schools and the languages that many children use at home (for India, see Mohanty, 2010;Singh and Bengay, 2014;Woodhead et al, 2013; also Mackenzie and Walker, 2013). Other studies found that even when the language of the school is the child's mother tongue, it may be a very different form of that language (e.g.…”

Section: Research Exploring Policy Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Medium of instruction policies in Ghanaian and Indian primary schools: an overview of key issues and recommendations

Erling

Adinolfi

Hultgren

et al. 2016

Comparative Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the MDGs and SDGs seek to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education, they rarely address the issue of Medium of Instruction (MOI). Increasing attention is being paid to appropriate and feasible language-in-education policies in LMICs and evidence which demonstrates the benefits and challenges of various policy options. Research in this field, though, tends to be diversified, with a range of small-scale empirical studies scattered among a number of disciplinary contexts. There is therefore a need to consolidate and systematically identify the extent to which this diverse body of literature has evaluated the various languagein-education policy options. To this end, this paper reports on a rigorous literature review of MOI-related research on Ghana and India, whose language-in-education policies represent two contrasting models of use of local languages and the development of competence in English. The paper begins by briefly overviewing the language-in-education policy in these two countries and sets out the methodological approach underpinning this review. It then turns to the initial findings, which are discussed in two parts: The first categorises the three areas of research explored in the empirical studies reviewed, namely the effectiveness of language-in-education policies, problems hindering the implementation of these policies, and attitudes to these policies. The second provides an overview of the recommendations for how, given the obstacles in implementing the current policies, to better ensure the effectiveness of language-in-education policies in Ghana and India. Together these findings show that similar 2 issues arise that contribute to challenges of providing equitable, quality education, and similar recommendations have been put forward as a result. This paper thus provides a valuable overview of key issues in the role of language-in-education policies in improving equity and quality in education in LMICs. [283 words]

show abstract

Section: Gottau and Moschetti-between Open And Internal Privatizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some provincial governments also launched some very modest initiatives of internal privatization relative to the 'inputs and services' dimension. Some school cafeterias and education advisory services were outsourced in line with the discourse of operational efficiency (Vior & Rodríguez, 2012).In the following decade, a new education law was passed replacing the Federal Education Law. The new National Education Law (26,206) changed the length of primary and secondary school cycles again and tried to dispense with the pro-market rhetoric introduced by the previous law.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Full Issue

Peco¹

2016

HSE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

_________________________________________________________________The educational system of Argentina has undergone a process of decentralization along with a steady growth in private schools enrolment. This complex process is usually subsumed under the general concept of 'privatization'. We have considered it necessary to provide a deeper understanding of the multiple dimensions this process of privatization encompasses. In this article we intend to analyze and reflect upon the transformations of the Argentine educational system and to understand the specific levels and aspects where privatization has taken place. We note that the public and the private sectors seem to have experienced divergent trajectories with compromising effects in terms of equity and social cohesion. We argue that the uneasy coexistence of a deregulated independent private sector and a hyperregulated public sector is the result of a partial and inadequate implementation of a public-private partnership scheme.Key words: privatization, inequalities, public-private partnerships, Argentina HSE -Social and Education History Vol. 5 No. 2 February 2016 pp. 112-133 2016 Hipatia Press ISSN: 2014-3567 DOI: 10.17583/hse.2016 Privatización Abierta e Interna del Sistema Educativo Argentino entre 1940 y 2010 Verónica Gottau Universidad de San Andrés (Argentina) Mauro Carlos Moschetti Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (Spain)Resumen _________________________________________________________________ En las últimas décadas, el sistema educativo Argentino ha experimentado un proceso de descentralización acaecido en paralelo de un proceso de crecimiento de la matrícula en las escuelas privadas. Este complejo proceso ha sido usualmente subsumido bajo fenómeno demasiado general de 'privatización'. Para obtener un conocimiento cabal de estos cambios, consideramos necesario presentar y distinguir las múltiples dimensiones que el proceso de privatización engloba. Este artículo pretende analizar y reflexionar sobre la transformación del sistema educativo argentino y entender los niveles y aspectos específicos en los que se llevó a cabo la privatización. Advertimos que tanto el sector privado como el sector público han experimentado trayectorias divergentes con efectos negativos en términos de equidad y cohesión social. Argumentamos que la difícil convivencia entre un sector privado independiente desregulado, y un sector público híper-regulado ha sido el resultado de una implementación parcial e inadecuada de una alianza público-privada. _______________________________________________________________ Palabras clave: privatización, inequidades, alianzas público-privadas, Argentina. Gottau & Moschetti-Between open and internal privatization114 he consolidation of national States and especially the strengthening of its disciplinary and cohesion power at the end of the XIX century created the conditions for the establishment of educational systems. These educational systems, modeled on the guidelines of the XVII century, reached its proliferation peak it t...

show abstract

Does growth in private schooling contribute to Education for All? Evidence from a longitudinal, two cohort study in Andhra Pradesh, India

Cited by 129 publications

References 21 publications

What Inequality means for Children

What Inequality means for Children

Medium of instruction policies in Ghanaian and Indian primary schools: an overview of key issues and recommendations

Full Issue

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About