"Financing for-profit schools deepens inequality and undermines public education systems"

"health of the public school system. From a public policy perspective, how should gov- ernments view the growth in private schooling? Should (Box continues next page) Source: World Bank (2017a). Table B9.3.1 Private providers account for a significant share of school enrollment Percentage of learners enrolled in private education, by country income group (2014) Country income group Preprimary Primary Secondary Low-income 57 14 20 Middle-income 42 13 25 High-income 42 12 20 Education systems are misaligned with learning | 177 Box 9.3 Can private schooling be aligned to learning for all? (continued) governments encourage its growth, whether by removing restrictions on new schools or even by providing public subsidies that allow more students to enroll in private schools? Is there a trade-off between the short-term growth of private schools and the long-term health of the education system? Private schools offer a variety of potential benefits. A straightforward one is proximity: new private schools can fill a gap when the nearest public schools are far away, or when there is demand to expand faster than public infrastructure can be built.k As for cost, in China, Ghana, and Kenya some private schools are comparable in cost to the public alternative.l Private schools can also innovate in ways that public schools cannot because they operate under fewer constraints. Moreover, private schools can ful- fill niches for families with preferences different from the government’s—for example, if parents value single-sex or religious education. Private schools may also have lower rates of teacher absence, such as in four countries in Sub- Saharan Africa.m In those schools, nonperforming teachers can be let go more easily than in public schools, increas- ing their accountability. Finally, competition from private schools could improve the performance of nearby public schools.n But these benefits come with many risks. Private schools may skim off the higher-income students who are easiest and most profitable to teach, leaving only the more disadvantaged students in the public system.o Private schooling may also deepen social cleavages along dimen- sions other than income if it causes students to be sorted by language, ethnicity, or religion. Because families are not necessarily knowledgeable about pedagogy, private schools can induce them to make choices that slow student learning—for example by discouraging mother tongue instruction. And because families cannot evaluate quality or learning perfectly, private providers may try to take advantage of them to increase profits or achieve their other goals. Finally, even if the expansion of private schooling brings short-term benefits, it can undermine the political constituency for effective public schooling in the longer term. It is impossible to make any global statement about whether the benefits or risks dominate. Experience with public-private partnerships is growing. As governments face their own limited capacity to cope with the learning crisis, some have turned to public-private partnerships in which they provide private schools with resources. In Pernambuco, Brazil, the state government is seeking to place half of the state’s students in govern- ment-funded private schools.p In Uganda, the government provided hundreds of private schools with the resources needed to meet the growing demand for secondary edu- cation.q In some cases, this means private providers essen- tially mirror public schools in terms of education policy, such as in the government-“aided” schools in India.r But in other cases, such as in voucher schools in the United States or Liberia’s Partnership Schools pilot, publicly funded pri- vate schools have significant leeway in how they run their schools, letting student learning results be the measure of quality.s In Uganda, public resources increased the quality"

", Brazil, the state government is seeking to place half of the state’s students in govern- ment-funded private schools.p In Uganda, the government provided hundreds of private schools with the resources needed to meet the growing demand for secondary edu- cation.q In some cases, this means private providers essen- tially mirror public schools in terms of education policy, such as in the government-“aided” schools in India.r But in other cases, such as in voucher schools in the United States or Liberia’s Partnership Schools pilot, publicly funded pri- vate schools have significant leeway in how they run their schools, letting student learning results be the measure of quality.s In Uganda, public resources increased the quality of private schools, and public-private partnerships are likely a useful strategy if countries seek to expand enroll- ments dramatically in a short time.t But overseeing private schools may be no easier than providing quality schooling. The key challenge for policy makers is to develop a policy and regulatory framework that ensures access for all children, protects families from exploitation, and establishes an environment that encour- ages education innovation. Managing a regulatory frame- work to achieve this is difficult: the same technical and political barriers that education systems face more gen- erally come into play. From a technical perspective, devel- oping a framework to accommodate the diverse nature of nonstate provision is complicated. In Bangladesh, for example, there are 11 separate categories for the nonstate provision of presecondary education (figure B9.3.1). Unlike government schools that are relatively homogeneous, nonstate provision reflects many different philosophies or approaches to education. The capacity of education agen- cies to effectively align incentives and monitor services is often limited, and assessing quality in contexts where education is provided in very different ways requires added skills. Though neither is easy, governments may deem it more straightforward to provide quality education than to regulate a disparate collection of providers that may not have the same objectives. The bottom line is that countries need to ensure that private schooling does not undermine learning for all. Different countries make different choices on private (Box continues next page) 178 | World Development Report 2018 linear relationships from cause to effect. The multiple interactions that characterize teaching and learning and the almost continuous feedback that they provide can result in teachers, parents, and students adapting their behavior in unpredictable ways. For example, the introduction of school grants in Andhra Pradesh, India, and in Zambia failed to improve student learn- ing in the long term because parents reduced their to monitor student learning are effective, they can sometimes lead to biases toward better-performing students, short-term test preparation, or a narrow focus on subjects that are explicitly tested. The multiplicity of actors and institutions in an education system makes the outcomes of efforts to improve learning unpredictable.24 Learning is a com- plex process that is difficult to break down into simple Box 9.3 Can private schooling be aligned to learning for all? (continued) delivery, acting on a variety of motivations. But if they do allow or even encourage private schooling, they need to remain alert to all the risks just outlined. The problems out- lined in this Report do not disappear simply because of a change in a delivery mechanism. Governments may choose to contract out some service delivery, but they should never contract out the responsibility for ensuring that all children and youth have the opportunity to learn. Source: WDR 2018 team, using data from Directorate of Primary Education, Bangladesh (2016). Data at http:// bit.do/WDR2018-Fig_B9-3-1. Note: NGO = nongovernmental organization. 0 5,000 10,000 15,000"