Social Policy: Education Development Economics ( Hons )

1. Social Policy: EducationDevelopment Economics (Hons) Nic Spaull Nicspaull.com/research 13 May 2015

2. Social Policy & Education Firstly, what is social policy? “Social policy primarily refers to the guidelines, principles, legislation and activities that affect the living conditions conducive to human welfare” “Public policy and practice in the areas of health care, human services, criminal justice, inequality, education, and labour” “Social Policy is defined as actions that affect the well-being of members of a society through shaping the distribution of and access to goods and resources in that society”

3. Social Policy & Education • Secondly, how does education fit into it? • Most areas of social policy influence education (in some way), and are influenced by education (in some way) • Bidirectional causality  • Multiple benefits of education…

4. $ Ed Benefits of education H S Ec • Improved human rights • Empowerment of women • Reduced societal violence • Promotion of a national (as opposed to regional or ethnic) identity • Increased social cohesion • Lower fertility • Improved child health • Preventative health care • Demographic transition • Improvements in productivity • Economic growth • Reduction of inter-generational cycles of poverty • Reductions in inequality Economy Health Society Specific references: lower fertility (Glewwe, 2002), improved child health (Currie, 2009), reduced societal violence (Salmi, 2006), promotion of a national - as opposed to a regional or ethnic - identity (Glewwe, 2002), improved human rights (Salmi, 2006), increased social cohesion (Heyneman, 2003), Economic growth – see any decent Macro textbook, specifically for cognitive skills see (Hanushek & Woessman 2008)

5. Social Policy & Education • Secondly, how does education fit into it? • Education itself affects society & the individual in real and meaningful ways: • Transforms individual capabilities, values, aspirations and desires (see Sen) • Allows individuals to think, feel and act in different ways • Enables new ways of organizing and supporting social action that depend on numeracy and literacy, technologies of communication and abstract thinking skills (Lewin, 2007). Democratic participation, knowledge creation etc. • Education increases peoples ability to add value (productivity) • “Modernising societies use educational access and attainment as a primary mechanism to sort and select subsequent generations into different social and economic roles” (Lewin, 2007: 3) Distribution of income • NB NB Education is different to the other forms of social policy in that it has the potential to change the GENERATIVE MECHANISMS of the income distribution, not simply re-allocating it once earned (as with grants)

6. Theory: Human Capital Education increases peoples ability to add value (productivity)  HCM + =   “The failure to treat human resources explicitly as a form of capital, as a produced means of production, as the product of investment, has fostered the retention of the classical notion of labour as a capacity to do manual work requiring little knowledge and skill, a capacity with which, according to this notion, labourers are endowed about equally. This notion of labour was wrong in the classical period and it is patently wrong now. Counting individuals who can and want to work and treating such a count as a measure of the quantity of an economic factor is no more meaningful than it would be to count the number of all manner of machines to determine their economic importance” (Schultz, 1961, p. 3). Incr wage Incr MP of L Man Skills & health Incr profits

7. Theory: Sorting & signalling • Education does not improve productivity or produce HC, instead acts as a signal of innate productivity/IQ/motivation. • Those with higher productivity/IQ/motivation will find it easier to get higher levels of education than those with lower P/IQ/M • Do we care if it is HCM or Signalling? • Yes! Implications for public investment.

8. Elusive equity • Given the strong links between education and income, educational inequality is a fundamental determinant of income inequality. • Clear need to understand SA educational inequality if we are to understand SA income inequality. • High inequality + unemployment 2 of the most severe problems facing SA • Educational quality is intimately intertwined with both of these. • “Education shall be free, compulsory, universal and equal for all children” (Freedom Charter) • Fiske and Ladd’s (2004) notions of: • Equal treatment • Equal educational opportunity • Educational adequacy

9. Not all schools are born equal ? Pretoria Boys High School SA public schools?

10. Education and inequality? • IQ • Motivation • Social networks • Discrimination

11. Leibbrandt et al 2010

12. Labour Market • University/FET • Type of institution (FET or University) • Quality of institution • Type of qualification(diploma, degree etc.) • Field of study (Engineering, Arts etc.) • High productivity jobs and incomes (15%) • Mainly professional, managerial & skilled jobs • Requires graduates, good quality matric or good vocational skills High quality secondaryschool Unequal society High SES background (with early childhood development) High quality primary school Minority (20%) Some motivated, lucky or talented students make the transition • Vocational training • Affirmative action • (few make this transition) • Big demand for good schools despite fees • Some scholarships/bursaries Majority (80%) Quality Type Attainment Low quality secondary school Low socioeconomic status background • Low productivity jobs & incomes • Often manual or low skill jobs • Limited or low quality education Low quality primary school Statistics from Quarterly Labour Force Survey (QLFS) 2014 Q4

13. Bimodality – indisputable fact PIRLS / TIMSS / SACMEQ / NSES / ANA / Matric… by Wealth / Language / Location / Dept…

14. Student performance 2003-2011 TIMSS (2011) prePIRLS(2011) ANA (2011)  PIRLS (2006) SACMEQ (2007) TIMSS 2003 (Gr8 Maths & Science) • Out of 50 participating countries (including 6 African countries) SA came last • Only 10% reached low international benchmark • No improvement from TIMSS 1999-TIMSS 2003 TIMSS (2003) PIRLS 2006 (Gr 4/5 – Reading) • Out of 45 participating countries SA came last • 87% of gr4 and 78% of Gr 5 learners deemed to be “at serious risk of not learning to read” SACMEQ III 2007 (Gr6 – Reading & Maths) • SA came 10/15 for reading and 8/15 for maths behind countries such as Swaziland, Kenya and Tanzania ANA 2011 (Gr 1-6 Reading & Maths) • Mean literacy score gr3: 35% • Mean numeracy score gr3: 28% • Mean literacy score gr6: 28% • Mean numeracy score gr6: 30% TIMSS 2011 (Gr9 – Maths & Science) • SA has joint lowest performance of 42 countries • Improvement by 1.5 grade levels (2003-2011) • 76% of grade nine students in 2011 still had not acquired a basic understanding about whole numbers, decimals, operations or basic graphs, and this is at the improved level of performance prePIRLS2011 (Gr 4 Reading) • 29% of SA Gr4 learners completely illiterate (cannot decode text in any langauge) • NSES 2007/8/9 • Systemic Evaluations 2007 • Matric exams

15. NSES question 42NSESfollowed about 15000 students (266 schools) and tested them in Grade 3 (2007), Grade 4 (2008) and Grade 5 (2009). Grade 3 maths curriculum: “Can perform calculations using appropriate symbols to solve problems involving: division of at least 2-digit by 1-digit numbers” Even at the end of Grade 5 most (55%+) quintile 1-4 students cannot answer this simple Grade-3-level problem. “The powerful notions of ratio, rate and proportion are built upon the simpler concepts of whole number, multiplication and division, fraction and rational number, and are themselves the precursors to the development of yet more complex concepts such as triangle similarity, trigonometry, gradient and calculus” (Taylor & Reddi, 2013: 194) (Spaull & Viljoen, forthcoming)

16. Matric 2014 (relative to Gr 2 in 2004) • 550,000 students drop out before matric • 99% do not get a non-matric qualification (Gustafsson, 2011: p11) • What happens to them? 50% youth unemployment…

17. Insurmountable learning deficits Figure 10b: South African mathematics learning trajectories by national socioeconomic quintiles using a variable standard deviation for a year of learning (0.28 in grade 3 to 0.2 in grade 8 with interpolated values for in-between grades (Based on NSES 2007/8/9 for grades 3/4/5, SACMEQ 2007 for grade 6 and TIMSS 2011 for grade 9, including 95% confidence interval Spaull & Viljoen, 2015

18. The impact of SES on reading/maths (SACMEQ III – 2007 Gr 6) • Almost 40% of SA student reading achievement can be explained by socioeconomic status (31 assets, books, parental education) alone. • In South Africa socioeconomic status largely determines outcomes (with a very small number of exceptions – see newspapers for examples) • Indication of wasted human capital potential (see Schleicher, 2009) Spaull, 2013

19. Intergenerational poverty Ideal world (AKA Finland  ) • Means blind • Ideally, an education system should be ‘means blind’ in that it offers equal educational opportunities to all students. • Meritocratic • Ideally, an individuals success at school (and later in the labour-market) should depend on ability and effort not class or wealth. • In SA, neither of these criteria are met. Low quality education is a poverty trap.

20. Further discussion • Access and Quality

21. Accountability & Capacity

22. Accountability without capacity • “Accountability systems and incentive structures, no matter how well designed, are only as effective as the capacity of the organization to respond. The purpose of an accountability system is to focus the resources and capacities of an organization towards a particular end. Accountability systems can’t mobilize resources that schools don’t have...the capacity to improve precedes and shapes schools’ responses to the external demands of accountability systems (Elmore, 2004b, p. 117). • “If policy-makers rely on incentives for improving either a school or a student, then the question arises, incentives to do what? What exactly should educators in failing schools do tomorrow - that they do not do today - to produce more learning? What should a failing student do tomorrow that he or she is not doing today?” (Loveless, 2005, pp. 16, 26). • “People who are being asked to do things they don’t know how to do, and being rewarded and punished on the basis of what they don’t know, rather than what they are learning, become skilled at subverting the purposes and authority of the systems in which they work. Bad policies produce bad behaviour. Bad behaviour produces value for no one” (Elmore, 2004a, p. 22).

23. Capacity without accountability • “In the absence of accountability sub-systems, support measures are very much a hit and miss affair. Accountability measures provide motivation for and direction to support measures, by identifying capacity shortcomings, establishing outcome targets, and setting in place incentives and sanctions which motivate and constrain teachers and managers throughout the system to apply the lessons learned on training courses in their daily work practices. Without these, support measures are like trying to push a piece of string: with the best will in the world, it has nowhere to go. Conversely, the performance gains achieved by accountability measures, however efficiently implemented, will reach a ceiling when the lack of leadership and technical skills on the part of managers, and curricular knowledge on the part of teachers, places a limit on improved performance. Thus, the third step in improving the quality of schooling is to provide targeted training programs to managers and teachers. To achieve optimal effects, these will need to connect up with and be steered by accountability measures” (Taylor, 2002, p. 17).

24. Good description of human behaviour • “The traditions of school effectiveness research and the economics of education bring complementary perspectives to bear. While the former assumes that individual actors, and in particular school principals and teachers, are motivated by altruism and the desire to do the best for the learners in their care, economists assume that actors are motivated largely by self-interest. Taken together, these views sound like a good description of human behaviour” (Taylor, Van der Berg & Mabogoane, 2013: 24)

31. “Only when schools have both the incentive to respond to an accountability system as well as the capacity to do so will there be an improvement in student outcomes.” (p22)

32. SA educational inequality

33. Questions • If not the quality of education, what is the driving force behind income inequality? • Demand-side factors > supply-side?! • Why is it so difficult to change educational outcomes? (20 years since 1994!) • What are the key interactions between education and health/social-security?

34. Conclusion Persistent patterns of poverty and privilege • Educational inequality is at the heart of income inequality and poverty • Increasing wages for the majority of Black labour market entrants is necessary to lower income inequality • This is not possible without improving the quality of education they receive • SA has 2 education systems not one • Implications for reporting (means are misleading) • Implications for policy • SA cannot convert material advantage into cognitive skills • Inefficient use of resources

35. Conclusions & Implications Persistent patterns of poverty and privilege

36. Suggestions • Acknowledge the extent of the problem • Low quality education is one of the three largest crises facing our country (along with HIV/AIDS and unemployment). Need the political will and public support for widespread reform. • Experiment to figure out what works • More of the same hasn’t worked  Need to try new things and rigorously evaluate them to see what works. • Workbooks & ANA’s are a positive sign (Workbook delivery?) • Failed programmes provide useful information when acknowledged & disseminated. • Leave existing salaries the same but pay good teachers more – why not? • Increase accountability, information & transparency • Where is the money going? • Deal ruthlessly with corruption – this is a social crime. • For at least one grade (Gr6?) get ANA externally validated by an independent body like Umalusi and get this information to parents  need to empower parents with information in an accessible format

37. References • Becker, G. (1962). Investment in Human Capital: A Theoretical Analysis. The Journal of Political Economy, 70(5), 9-49. • Currie, J. (2009). Healthy, Wealthy, and Wise: Socioeconomic Status, Poor Health in Childhood, and Human Capital Development. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(1), 87-122. • Donalson, A. (1992). Content, Quality and Flexibility: The Economics of Education System Change. Spotlight 5/92. Johannesburg: South African Institute of Race Relations. • Fleisch, B. (2008). Primary Education in Crisis: Why South African schoolchildren underachieve in reading and mathematics. Cape Town. : Juta & Co. • Hanushek, E. & Woessmann, L. (2008). The Role of Cognitive Skills in Economic Development. Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research Working Paper No. 07-34. • Hoadley, U. (2010). What do we know about teaching and learning in primary schools in South Africa? Stellenbosch: Appendix B to Van der Berg, S; Meyer, H; Reeves, C; van Wyk, C; Hoadley, U; Bot, M; & Armstrong, P 2010. 'Grade 3 Improvement Project: Main report and Recommendations" for Western Cape Education Department. • Schultz, T. (1961). Investment in Human Capital. The American Economic Review, 51 (1), 1-17. • Shepherd, D. (2011). Constraints to School Effectiveness: What prevents poor schools from delivering results? Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers 05/11. • Spaull, N. (2011). Primary School Performance in Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia and South Africa: A Comparative Analysis of SACMEQ III. SACMEQ Working Papers , 1-74. • Taylor, S. (2011). Uncovering Indicators of Effective School Management in South Africa using the National School Effectiveness Study. Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers . • Van der Berg, S. (2007). Apartheid's Enduring Legacy: Inequalities in Education. Journal of African Economies, 16(5), 849-880.

38. Thank you www.nicspaull.com/research nicholasspaull@gmail.com @NicSpaull

39. Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 ECD Foundation Phase Intermediate Phase Senior Phase FET Phase Foundation Phase Intermediate Phase Senior Phase FET Phase Mother-tongue instruction De facto / De jure ? Primary school Main drop-out zone High school

40. Theory – education in SA • Type of tertiary education (quality) - institution and field of study • Demand and supply • Individual motivation • Parental IQ (assortative mating) • Maternal health • Nutrition • Early cognitive stimulation: preschool (quantity & quality), home environment South Africa • Average school SES • Language of learning & teaching (LOLT) • Teacher quality • Peer effects • Subject choice • Cost of tertiary education (explicit & implicit costs) • Parental & personal aspirations and perceptions • Society/culture (See Taylor, 2010)

41. Overview of what we know about inequality and underperformance in South Africa

42. Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Foundation Phase Intermediate Phase Senior Phase FET Phase National School Effectiveness Study (NSES) • Grade 3 (2007); Grade 4 (2008); Grade 5 (2009) – Panel 268 schools • [All provinces except Gauteng] ____________________________________ Underperformance • Language: In 44% of Gr4 and 32% of Gr5 classes there was no paragraph writing done over the year (from best learner). • Mathematics: 88% of Gr5 maths teachers covered no more than 35 of the 89 topics (40%) in the gr5 maths curriculum Inequality • Frequency of paragraph writing (half a page or less) EC/KZN=1.7; WC=5.8 /year • Grade 3 students in historically white schools perform much better on the same test than grade 5 students from historically black schools Taylor, 2011

43. Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Foundation Phase Intermediate Phase Senior Phase FET Phase PIRLS 2006 – see Shepherd (2011) prePIRLS 2011 • Grade 4 – all 11 languages • 433 schools, 19259 students ____________________________________ Underperformance • 29% of gr4 students did not reach the low international benchmark – they could not read • SA performs similarly to Botswana, but 3 years learning behind average Columbian Gr4 Inequality • Linguistic inequalities: Large differences by home language – Xitsonga, Tshivenda and Sepedi students particularly disadvantaged • PIRLS (2006) showed LARGE differences between African language schools and Eng/Afr schools • Howie et al (2011) • *Data now available for download

44. Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Foundation Phase Intermediate Phase Senior Phase FET Phase SACMEQ 2007 • Grade 6 – Numeracy and literacy • 392 schools, 9071 students ____________________________________ Underperformance • 27% of students functionally illiterate • SA performs worse than many low-income African countries (Tanzania, Kenya, Swaziland, Zimbabwe) • No improvement between SACMEQ II (2000) and SACMEQ III (2007) • Although majority (98%) of students are enrolled, sometimes almost no learning Inequality • Large differences between quintiles (see table later) • Large inequalities in maths teacher content knowledge Gr 6 Teacher Content Knowledge - see McKay & Spaull (2013)

45. SACMEQ III (Spaull & Taylor, 2012) Literacy Numeracy

46. Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Foundation Phase Intermediate Phase Senior Phase FET Phase TIMSS 2011 • Grade 9 – Maths and science • 285 schools, 11969 students ____________________________________ Underperformance • 76% of Gr9 students had not acquired a basic understanding about whole numbers, decimals, operations or basic graphs (i.e. had not reached low int. benchmark) • Avg. Gr 9 SA student is 2yrs (2.8yrs) behind the average Gr8 student from a middle income country in maths (science) • Contrary to popular belief, even South Africa’s “top” schools do not perform well by international standards… Inequality • Avg Q1/Q2 Gr9 student is 3yrs (4yrs) worth of learning behind the average Q5 student in maths (science) • Avg Gr 9 student in ECA is 2yrs worth of learning behind avg Gr9 student in GAU *Data now available for download

47. Performance of quintile five schools in TIMSS 2003 Maths – see Taylor MST (2011) Even Q5 schools in SA perform at a comparatively low level

48. Gr 1 - Gr 2 - Gr 3 – Gr 4 – Gr 5 – Gr 6 – Gr 7 – Gr 8 – Gr 9 - Gr 10 – Gr 11 – Gr 12 Foundation Phase Intermediate Phase Senior Phase FET Phase Matric • Grade 12 – Various • Roughly half the cohort ____________________________________ Underperformance • Of 100 students that enroll in grade 1 approximately 50 will make it to matric, 40 will pass and 12 will qualify for university Inequality • Subject combinations differ between rich and poor – differential access to higher education • Maths / Maths-lit case in point • Are more students taking maths literacy because THEY cannot do pure-maths, or because their TEACHERS cannot teach pure-maths?

49. See Taylor (2012) Matric • More students making it to grade 10 but not more making it to matric • Partially due to less repetition at lower grades • LARGE differences in the ability of provinces to “convert” grade 1 enrolments into matric passes • Why are more students taking maths literacy? The ratio of grade 2 enrolments ten years prior to matric to matric passes by province See Taylor (2012)

50. Matric pass rate What are the root causes of low and unequal achievement? Subject choice Throughput No. endorsements Media sees only this MATRIC Quality? Pre-MATRIC 50% dropout Low curric coverage Low accountability Weak culture of T&L Vested interests Low time-on-task No early cognitive stimulation Low quality teachers HUGE learning deficits…