1

Improving Secondary Education

Preparation for the Implementation of the 10th National Economic and

Social Development Plan

October 27, 2006Bangkok, Thailand

2

• Overview• Access and Equity

• Quality• Efficiency

• Addressing Next Generation of Challenges

3

Secondary Education: Potential Roles

• Bridging basic education, tertiary education and labor market

• A key tool for alleviating poverty in Thailand, bringing broader income equality and social equity

• Contributing to higher social returns (e.g. in health)• Contributing to non-market public benefits (e.g. voting

rates, association with crime)

Overview

4

Overview

• 1999 NEA “Equal right to receive 12 years of basic education of

quality without charge”

– Major reforms in all aspects, especially • learning reform learner-centered, curriculum• teacher reform teacher training, professional

standardization• education quality assurance internal and external

quality monitoring mechanisms

• 1997 Constitution– Local administration organization participation in

provision of education

Historical Background

5

Education Transition PatternsOverview

6

Education Attainment

• Consistent gradual rise of average years of education attainment overtime

• For population ages 15-21, average years of education attainment is nearly 10 years, suggesting successful compulsory education

Table 2.1: Average Years of Educational Attainment, 1999-2003

Age 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 15 and over 7.1 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8

15-21 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 15-59 7.7 7.8 7.7 7.8 7.9

60 and over 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9

Source: Office of Education Council 2004a

Access

7

Education AttainmentFigure 2.A: Thailand Educational Attainment Profiles for Ages 16 to 19, 1994-2002

.2

.4

.6

.8

1P

ropo

rtion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Grade

1994 1996 19981999 2000 2002

All Thailand: 1994 to 2002

Source: Household Socio-Economic Survey 1994, 2002

• 95% of 16-19 population completed primary education and 80% completed secondary education in 2002

• In 1994, only 50% of 16-19 population had completed secondary education

• Repetition is slight (1-2%) and most dropout occurs between levels

Access

8

Gender Equity

• Gender gap has grown larger, and to the benefit of girls

• In 1994, NER for girls was 63% and 61% for boys

• In 2002, NER for girls was 72% and 64% for boys

Figure 2.C: School Participation Rates, Gross Enrollment Rates and Net Enrollment Rates by Sex and Gains, 1994-2002

61 3

63 9

68 5

69 12

74 9

75 14

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Male-NER

Female-NER

Male-GER

Female-GER

Male-SPR

Female-SPR

1994 2002

Access

9

Rural-Urban Equity

• Coverage expanded to rural areas.

• Urban-rural gap for grade completion has decreased from 25% in 1994 to 8% in 2002.

Figure 2.D: Grade Completion by Urban/Rural Location, 1994 and 2002

.2

.4

.6

.8

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Grade

Urban

Rural

Urban/Rural: 1994

.2

.4

.6

.8

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Grade

Urban

Rural

Urban/Rural: 2002

Source: Household Socio-Economic Survey 1994, 2002

Access

10

GER: International ComparisonFigure 2.G: Trends in Secondary Gross Enrollment Rates across Asian Countries, 1980-2003

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1980 1990 1995 2000 2003

Year

Perc

enta

ge

Cambodia Indonesia Lao PDRMalaysia Myanmar NepalPhilippines Thailand Vietnam

Note: Data for Thailand and Philippines in 2000 are from World Development Indicators 2003

Source: World Development Indicators Database, World Bank 2006

Access

11

Reaching out to the Excluded

• Limited information on out-of-school children• Migrants, children with disabilities and ethnic

minorities are under-represented in secondary education

• In 2004, 175,000 children with disabilities enrolled in pre-primary to upper secondary level (1.27% of population ages 3-17).

• Financial constraints are often identified as the main obstacle keeping students out of schools

Access

12

Measuring Quality Comparatively…Figure 3.A: PISA 2003 Test Score Results in Mathematics by Income Group

Source: di Gropello 2006

Figure 3.B: PISA 2000 Test Score Results in Reading Literacy by Income Group

Source: di Gropello 2006

0

20

40

60

80

100

Lower Middle Upper Middle Upper OECD Avg

Perc

entag

e of

Stu

dent

s in

each

Pro

ficie

ncy

Lev

el

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Mea

n Sc

ore

Level 6 Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Below Level 1 Mean

Bra

zil

Ind

ones

ia

Thai

land

Mex

ico

Uru

guay

Japa

n

Kor

ea

Hon

g K

ong

• Thailand trails significantly behind Japan, Hong Kong SAR and Korea on international assessments.

• Compared to other lower middle income countries, Thailand performs better than its peers both in terms of mean test scores and proficiency level distribution.

• However, very few Thai children score in top proficiency levels (e.g. 40% at or below PISA level one in literacy and over 50% in Mathematics)

Quality

13

Factors Affecting Student Achievement

Teacher

• 87% of OBEC secondary school teachers earned a bachelor’s degree.

• Higher levels of teacher confidence associated with superior student scores (TIMSS 1999) … 55% of students taught by instructors who felt less than adequately prepared in math and 58% in science.

• Front-style lecture format. Limited opportunities to apply knowledge to new situations or exercise creative thinking during school days.

Quality

14

Factors Affecting Student Achievement

School

• Class sizes in Asia tend to be large, but do not appear to have a negative impact on student test scores in Thailand.

• However, the relationship between class size and student achievement is difficult to extricate.

• Quality of school physical infrastructure rated around OECD country mean, but availability of educational resources is rated much lower (-0.82) and inequitably distributed.

• Less than 40% of students have access to a calculator.

Quality

15

Factors Affecting Student Achievement

Household/ Individual

• The distribution of knowledge across income groups is fairly equitable.

• Socioeconomic status is not influential in shaping student aspirations for tertiary education.

• Higher income families willing to pay more for children’s education (Q5: 7,878 Bht vs Q1: 840 Bht per year)

Quality

16

Public Spending on Education• 20% of total Government budget allocated to education (4% of

GDP)• Secondary education received 28% of total education budget

(1.13% of GDP)

Figure 4.A: Share of Education Budget by Spending Category, 1997-2004

Source: Ministry of Education

0% 5%

10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

35% 40% 45% 50%

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Pre Primary and Primary Secondary Tertiary Services not defined by level Educational support Others

Efficiency

17

Public Spending across Income QuintileEfficiency

Figure 4.C: Incidence of Public Expenditure across Income Quintiles by Education Level, 2002

3119

5

25

23

7

21

22

12

15

20

23

8 15

53

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Pre & Primary Secondary TertiaryEducation Level

Perc

enta

ge

Q1 (poorest) Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 (richest)

Source: Household Socio-Economic Survey 2002

• Pro-poor allocation of resources at primary level

• Quintile distribution for secondary education is relatively equitable

• Spending for tertiary education is clearly regressive

18

Public Spending on Secondary Education

• Comparatively, Thailand under-spends in secondary education (1.13% of GDP):– OECD countries spend 2.1% of GDP– Lower middle income countries spend 1.86% of GDP

• Per student public spending on secondary education is 24% lower than for primary education– EAP: Unit cost for 2ry education was 74% greater than for 1ry

education– OECD: Unit cost for 2ry education was 39% greater than for 1ry

education

• Share of local government resources spent on education still low. Much reliance on central government

Efficiency

19

Household Education Expenditure• Only 5% share of private resources in secondary

education.• Average household spending varies significantly across

regions and income quintiles.Table 4.3: Total Secondary Education Expenditure as % of GDP by Sources of Funding, 2003

Public Resources

Private Resources

(% of GDP)

(% of GDP)

Argentina Upper-middle 1.58 0.38 24%

Chile Upper-middle 1.49 0.7 47%

Colombia Lower-middle 1.53 1 65%

Hong Kong, SAR High 1.5 0.75 50%

Indonesia Lower-middle 0.48 0.28 58%

Mexico Upper-middle 1.52 0.4 26%

Philippines Lower-middle 0.69 0.58 84%

Korea High 1.83 0.6 32%

Thailand Lower-middle 1.13 0.06 5%

Source: UNESCO 2005

Income Level Share of Private

Resources in all Domestic Resources

Efficiency

20

Raising Efficiency of Secondary Education Financing

• Does financing make a difference in schooling outcomes?– “The greater the socio-economic advantage, the greater the

advantage it has in terms of student performance” (OECD 2004)– Quality improvements are costlier at secondary level than at

primary level.• Need to assess inter-sectoral allocative efficiency and

benefit-incidence of public investments• Could there be savings from rationalizing student-teacher

ratio/school merging? delicate balance– Teachers/student and time spent at school analysis suggests

inefficiencies in teacher deployment– Lowering cost VS individualized attention to students– School location within a reasonable distance

Efficiency

21

Increasing Access and Equity

• Improving data collection and analysis to better target the currently excluded.

• Alternative education service modalities can be strengthened. Greater flexibility in terms of learning sites, class schedule and curriculum.

• Financial disparities between provinces and income groups could be minimized through the use of a funding formula that factors in conditions and different needs across provinces and income groups.

Challenges

22

Improving Quality• Enhancing pre-service and in-service teacher

development• Developing criteria and methods to upgrade teacher

standards and quality. Capacity building for both teachers and principals

• Further strengthening quality assurance mechanisms. Relevance and follow up need to be guaranteed

• Strengthening accountability of schools to communities as an incentive to improve educational quality

• Reinforcing step-by-step implementation plan for decentralization of education provision and management

Challenges

23

Assuring Efficiency

• Explore reallocation of resources from other educational levels to secondary schooling

• Careful review of student-teacher ratio/class size• Encourage higher level of private spending on education

Challenges