140 likes | 242 Vues
Stakeholder discussions meeting Textbooks development and per-capita financing in education . Bishkek, 21 October 2011. Textbook provision and development. Key issues since the collapse of the Soviet Era
E N D
Stakeholder discussions meetingTextbooks development and per-capita financing in education Bishkek, 21 October 2011
Textbook provision and development Key issues since the collapse of the Soviet Era • Provision– Cost and financing & Shortage – free textbook provision no longer possible due to collapse of public revenue. Cost unaffordable to families. Shortage in core subjects and insufficient to cover all students • Development - Content & Mechanism for assuring quality. Content outdated. Require modernization but hampered by inbred process • Monopoly and conflict of interest in authorship, selection and production
Textbooks - What the Rural Education Project has done? • Improve the Textbook Rental Scheme function and process to address the cost/financing issue; • Increase availability of textbooks in core subjects and reduce shortage in all grades by reprinting more books; • Address the outdated content by developing new books to align to changes in curriculum; • Improve the process of development by open competition for authorship, unbundle the functions of authorship, selection and production.
Why Per Capita Funding? ECA/CIS countries had an excessive number of schools with very low student/teacher ratios Examples: • 47 percent of all schools in Armenia had less than 300 students by 2003 • Lithuania averaged only 12 students per teacher from 2000-2005
PCF As A Response • Straightforward concept • ‘Formula funding’ in which school budgets are allocated according to a written rule • Budgets with fixed categories NOT decided by central governments • Local authorities and/or schools are given fixed amounts of financing based on the numbers of students enrolled
What is PCF? • Framework for the effective decentralization of the education systems in ECA. • Local authorities are given some autonomy in the use of resources, and can efficiently manage them. • Local authorities are expected to conform to adequate accountability mechanisms • Central authorities structure finance rules and accountability mechanisms
Does PCF Work? • 6 countries in ECA implemented some form of per student financing: Armenia, Estonia, Georgia, Lithuania, Poland, and Russia • The Bank supports the implementation of per student financing in Bulgaria, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Romania, Moldova, and Kosovo
Results – other countries • Over five years, Poland reduced its number of primary schools by 10% • Lithuania reduced its small primary schools from 808 to 114 • Russian Chuvash Republic reduced its total number of schools by 18% • Armenia reduced its teaching staff by 35% by offering a generous package of training and payments for severance, relocation, and small business start-up support • Performance of the PCF in different countries varies due to different methods of implementation.
PCF in the Kyrgyz Republic • Initial pilot in Issyk-Ata rayon, Chui oblast • PCF and formula for calculating categorical grant based on the minimum standards were introduced in Batken and Issyk-Kul oblasts • Expansion of the above to Bishkek and Osh is planned for 2012 • USAID financed introduction of the PCF to Chui
Going Forward - The Jury Is Still Out • Implementation of PCF is at the early stage and continues to evolve • Adjustments will be done with progress of PCF • An evaluation is still underway to assess the results and inform the future implementation • A lots of variables in the process would influence the final results
Current regional disparities • The number of pupils per teacher varies from 9.7 in Naryn to 17.2 in Osh city • Teacher wages also vary a lot: from 72,000 in Issyk-Kul to 145,000 Som in Bishkek • There may be some room for equalization and efficiency improvement • But population density may be an obstacle for school/class consolidation
Margins of efficiency are limited (1/2) • One can seek savings through • Optimization of classes within schools (without school mergers or closures) by fixing a ceiling number of pupils by class • Optimization by merging the smallest sections (i.e. set of classes taught in a given language) without closing the schools • Simulations can be realized using the Osh1 data.
Margins of efficiency are limited (2/2) • By setting a maximum number of pupils by class of 33, one would save 1,800 teachers’ positions (2.6%) • Setting a ceiling of 30 only would lead to an increased wage bill of 3.2%. • Classes are already large in certain areas • By merging the small sections (less than 10 pupils) at the municipal (without school closures) one could save an additional 1350 teachers’ position (savings up to 4.6% in total). • More than 12,500 pupils should be bussed within the municipalities