1

Poverty and Privilege: Primary School Inequality in South Africa

Carnegie III Conference - UCT 4 September 2012

Nicholas Spaullnicholasspaull@gmail.com

www.nicspaull.com/research

Education and inequality?

Type of education

Quality of education

Duration of

education

SA is one of the top 3 most

unequal countries in the world

Between 78% and 85% of

total inequality is explained by

wage inequality

Wages

• IQ• Motivation• Social

networks• Discrimination

3

Outline

1. Rationale for the research2. Extant literature on education inequality in SA

– Two education systems not one

3. Theoretical framework: Schooling & Poverty4. Modelling two data generating processes

– Deciding where to split the distribution into two?– Do the same factors affect both systems?

5. Conclusions & Recommendations

4

Rationale

• Theoretically education can play a large role in social mobility.

• Why has it not fulfilled this role in SA?

• Bimodality in student achievement data?

Human capital is of economic importance

Cognitive skills are a better measure of human capital

than educational attainment.

Cognitive skills in South Africa are

remarkably low and highly unequal

EquityDimension

EfficiencyDimension

How can one increase the cognitive skills of South African primary school children?

Modelling learner performance in South

Africa

Conclusion

ResourcesPhysical and human resources are highly

inequitably distributed across provinces,

socioeconomic quintiles, and school locations.

PerformanceReading and mathematics

performance are highly inequitably distributed

across provinces, socioeconomic quintiles

and school locations.

Resources South Africa in regional

context: Other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa

perform better with fewer resources.

PerformanceMost South African

schools are unable to produce learners who can

satisfy the demands of curriculum.

Not all schools are equally able to

convert additional resources into

educational outputs.

Ch

ap

ter

2L

itera

ture

Re

vie

wC

ha

pte

r 3

Pre

limin

ary

An

aly

sis

Ch

ap

ter

4M

od

elli

ng

Le

arn

er

Pe

rfo

rma

nce

Ch

ap

ter

5C

on

clu

sio

n

Not all schools are born equal

5

SA public schools?

?

6

0.0

01

.00

2.0

03

.00

4.0

05

kden

sity

re

ad

ing te

st s

core

0 200 400 600 800reading test score

African language schools English/Afrikaans schools

Extant literature: Two school systems not one

Language• Grade 5 [2006]• Data: PIRLS• (Shepherd, 2011)

7

Two school systems not one

Ex-department• Grade 4 [2008]• Data: NSES• (Taylor, 2011)

0.0

05.0

1.0

15.0

2.0

25D

ensity

0 20 40 60 80 100Numeracy score 2008

Ex-DET/ Homelands schools Historically white schools

8

2 Systems

0.0

05.0

1.0

15.0

2D

ensi

ty

0 20 40 60 80 100Literacy score (%)

Black WhiteIndian Asian

U-ANA 2011

Kernel Density of Literacy Score by Race (KZN)

0.0

05

.01

.015

.02

Density

0 20 40 60 80 100Numeracy score (%)

BlackColouredWhite

U-ANA 2011

Kernel Density of Numeracy Score by Race (FST)

Race• Grade 1-6 [2011]• Data: ANA 2011

9

Dysfunctional Schools (75% of schools) Functional Schools (25% of schools)

Weak accountability Strong accountability

Incompetent school management Good school management

Lack of culture of learning, discipline and order Culture of learning, discipline and order

Inadequate LTSM Adequate LTSM

Weak teacher content knowledge Adequate teacher content knowledge

High teacher absenteeism (1 month/yr) Low teacher absenteeism (2 week/yr)

Slow curriculum coverage, little homework or testing Covers the curriculum, weekly homework, frequent testing

High repetition & dropout (Gr10-12) Low repetition & dropout (Gr10-12)

Extremely weak learning: most students fail standardised tests Adequate learner performance (primary and matric)

2 education systems

See Hoadley (2010), Fleisch (2008), Van der Berg et al (2011), Taylor (2012) as a few of many

10

Attai

nmen

tQ

ualit

yTy

pe

High SES background

High quality primary school

High quality

secondaryschool

Low SES background

Low quality primary school

Low quality secondary

school

Unequal society

10% Low

productivity jobs &

incomes

(55%)

Unemployed

(35%)

Labour Market

High productivity jobs and incomes (10%)

• Mainly professional, managerial & skilled jobs

• Requires graduates, good quality matric or good vocational skills

• Historically mainly white

Low productivity jobs & incomes

• Often manual or low skill jobs

• Limited or low quality education

• Minimum wage can exceed productivity

University/FET

• Type of institution (FET or University)

• Quality of institution • Type of qualification

(diploma, degree etc.)• Field of study

(Engineering, Arts etc.)

• Vocational training• Affirmative action

Schools Characterised by:• Little parental involvement• No accountability• Little discipline• Weak management• High teacher absenteeism

Teaching Characterised by:• Low cognitive demand• Slow curriculum coverage• Inadequate LTSM• Weak & infrequent assessment• Weak teacher content knowledge

Schools Characterised by:• Strong accountability• Well managed & organized• Good school discipline• Culture of L & T

Teaching Characterised by:• High cognitive demand• Full curriculum coverage• Adequate LTSM• Frequent assessment

Majority (80%)

Some motivated, lucky or talented students make the transition

Minority (20%)

- Big demand for good schools despite fees

- Some scholarships/bursaries

cf. Servaas van der Berg

11

Attai

nmen

tQ

ualit

yTy

pe

High SES background

High quality primary school

High quality

secondaryschool

Low SES background

Low quality primary school

Low quality secondary

school

Unequal society

10% Low

productivity jobs &

incomes

(55%)

Unemployed

(35%)

Labour Market

High productivity jobs and incomes (10%)

• Mainly professional, managerial & skilled jobs

• Requires graduates, good quality matric or good vocational skills

• Historically mainly white

Low productivity jobs & incomes

• Often manual or low skill jobs

• Limited or low quality education

• Minimum wage can exceed productivity

University/FET

• Type of institution (FET or University)

• Quality of institution • Type of qualification

(diploma, degree etc.)• Field of study

(Engineering, Arts etc.)

• Vocational training• Affirmative action

Schools Characterised by:• Little parental involvement• No accountability• Little discipline• Weak management• High teacher absenteeism

Teaching Characterised by:• Low cognitive demand• Slow curriculum coverage• Inadequate LTSM• Weak & infrequent assessment• Weak teacher content knowledge

Schools Characterised by:• Strong accountability• Well managed & organized• Good school discipline• Culture of L & T

Teaching Characterised by:• High cognitive demand• Full curriculum coverage• Adequate LTSM• Frequent assessment

Majority (80%)

Some motivated, lucky or talented students make the transition

Minority (20%)

- Big demand for good schools despite fees

- Some scholarships/bursaries

cf. Servaas van der Berg

12

Splitting the 2 systems

• If there are indeed two education systems in SA and not one, where/how do we draw the line between one and the other?

0.0

02.0

04.0

06.0

08D

ensi

ty

0 200 400 600 800 1000Student Reading Score

Poorest 33% Middle 33%Wealthiest 33%

SACMEQ I I I Sout h Af rica

Kernel Density of Student Reading Score by School SES Terciles0

.002

.004

.006

.008

Den

sity

0 200 400 600 800 1000Student Reading Score

Poorest 50% Wealthiest 50%

SACMEQ I I I Sout h Af r ica

Kernel Density of Student Reading Score by School SES (half)0

.002

.004

.006

.008

Den

sity

0 200 400 600 800 1000Student Reading Score

Poorest 25% Second Poorest 25%%Second Wealthiest 25% Wealthiest 25%

SACMEQ I I I Sout h Af rica

Kernel Density of Student Reading Score by School SES Quartiles

0.0

02.0

04.0

06.0

08D

ensi

ty

0 200 400 600 800 1000Student Reading Score

Poorest 20% Second Poorest 20%Middle 20% Second Wealthiest 20%Wealthiest 20%

SACMEQ I I I Sout h Af rica

Kernel Density of Student Reading Score by School SES Quintile

14

0.0

02.0

04.0

06.0

08

Den

sity

0 200 400 600 800 1000Learner Reading Score

Poorest 25% Second poorest 25%Second wealthiest 25% Wealthiest 25%

Two school systems not one

Socioeconomic Status

• Grade 6 [2007]• Data: SACMEQ• (Spaull, 2011)

Source: Spaull, 2011

Comparing SA & Botswana

16

Corroborating evidence?

• Teacher knowledge• Teacher absenteeism• Textbook access• Literacy/numeracy rates• Grade repetition• Parental education• Homework frequency

0.0

02.0

04.0

06.0

08

Den

sity

0 200 400 600 800 1000Learner Reading Score

Poorest 25% Second poorest 25%Second wealthiest 25% Wealthiest 25%

17

Teacher knowledgeSACMEQ III (2007) 401/498 Gr6 Mathematics teachers

SACMEQ Maths teacher test Q17

QuintileAvg

1 2 3 4 5Correct 23% 22% 38% 40% 74% 38%

Correct answer (7km):

38% of Gr 6 Maths teachers

7

2 education systems

18

Teacher absenteeism

• What is the distribution of teacher absenteeism across school SES quintiles?

0 10 20 30 40 50Days absent per year

Quintile 5

Quintile 2

Quintile 3

Quintile 4

Quintile 1

excludes outside values

SACMEQ III South Africa

19

Student competency levels

• What proportion of students are reaching higher order competency levels?

020

4060

8010

0

Per

cent

5 4 3 2 1

Quintiles of School Socio-economic Status

L1 - Pre Reading L2 - Emergent Reading

L3 - Basic Reading L4 - Reading for Meaning

L5 - Interpretive Reading L6 - Inferential Reading

L7 - Analytical Reading L8 - Critical Reading

Reading Competency Levels

20

Do the ends justify the means?

BOT KEN LES MAL MOZ NAM SOU SWA TAN UGA ZAM ZAN ZIM

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

10 1012

52

15

31

7

-6

1416

0

17

SACMEQ III Reading scores: Mean – Median SACMEQ Standard deviation approx 100

Drowning in 6 inchesThere was a nonswimmer from Berlin,

Who loved statistics and gin,It’s little surprise that he reached his demise

While crossing a stream of average depth six inches

21

22

Modelling student performance

• Two data-generating processes. Little reason to believe there is the same underlying DGP

• Split samples – Wealthiest 25% of schools– Poorest 75% of schools

• Which coefficients are large & significant across the two regressions?

11/29 variables common

5/27 variables common

25

Conclusions & Implications

We have 2 education systems in South Africa

26

Conclusions & Implications

1. Reporting education statistics in SA– Means are uniquely misleading in SA – the average child does not exist in any meaningful

sense– Report educational statistics by quintile in addition to province– You can’t solve a problem that doesn’t officially exist

2. Modelling educational performance in SA– Modelling a single education system when there are two can lead to spurious results

3. Policy differentiation– Policies suited to one system are not necessarily suited to the other– Don’t interfere with high-performing schools If it aint broke don’t (try) fix it– LITNUM intervention in WC Blanket approach

We have 2 education systems in South Africa

Conclusions & Implications

27

Hereditary poverty

Low social

mobility

Low quality

education

Persistent patterns of poverty and privilege

28

3 biggest challenges - SA

1.Failure to get the basics right• Children who cannot read, write and compute properly (Functionally

illiterate/innumerate) after 6 years of formal full-time schooling• Often teachers lack even the most basic knowledge

2.Equity in education• 2 education systems – dysfunctional system operates at bottom of African

countries, functional system operates at bottom of developed countries.• More resources is NOT the silver bullet – we are not using existing resources

3.Lack of accountability • Little accountability to parents in majority of school system• Little accountability between teachers and Department • Teacher unions abusing power and acting unprofessionally

29

Way forward?

1. 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.

2. Focus on the basics• Every child MUST master the basics of foundational numeracy and literacy these are the

building blocks of further education – weak foundations = recipe for disaster• Teachers need to be in school teaching (re-introduce inspectorate?)• Every teacher needs a minimum competency (basic) in the subjects they teach• Every child (teacher) needs access to adequate learning (teaching) materials• Use every school day and every school period – maximise instructional time

3. Increase information, accountability & transparency• At ALL levels – DBE, district, school, classroom, learner• Strengthen ANA• Set realistic goals for improvement and hold people accountable

30

Education

“Education is the great engine of personal development. It is through education that the daughter of a peasant can become a doctor, that the son of a mineworker can become the head of the mine, that a child of farm-workers can become the president”

– Nelson Mandela

If we looked at 200 Grade 1 children 12 years ago and then look at them again in matric, only 1 out of the 200 were eligible for a maths or science degree based on their matric marks – the correspodning figure for white children was 15 times higher.

31

References

• Fleisch, B. (2008). Primary Education in Crisis: Why South African schoolchildren underachieve in reading and mathematics. Cape Town. : Juta & Co.

• Hoadley, U. (2010). What doe we know about teaching and learning in primary schools in South Africa? A review of the classroom-based research literature. Report for the Grade 3 Improvement project of the University of Stellenbosch. Western Cape Education Department.

• Hungi, N., Makuwa, D., Ross, K., Saito, M., Dolata, S., van Capelle, F., et al. (2011). SACMEQ III Project Results: Levels and Trends in School Resources among SACMEQ School Systems. Paris: Southern and Eastern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality.

• Ross, K., Saito, M., Dolata, S., Ikeda, M., Zuze, L., Murimba, S., et al. (2005). The Conduct of the SACMEQ III Project. In E. Onsomu, J. Nzomo, & C. Obiero, The SACMEQ II Project in Kenya: A Study of the Conditions of Schooling and the Quality of Education. Harare: SACMEQ.

• Shepherd, D. (2011). Constraints to School Effectiveness: What prevents poor schools from delivering results? Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers 05/11. [PIRLS]

• Spaull, N. (2011a). A Preliminary Analysis of SACMEQ III South Africa.Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers.• Spaull, N. (2011). Primary School Performance in Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia and South Africa. Paris: Southern and Eastern

African Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality (SACMEQ) Working Paper no.8.• Spaull, N. 2012 Equity & Efficiency in South African primary schools : a preliminary analysis of SACMEQ III South Africa Masters

Thesis. Economics. Stellenbosch University• Taylor, S. (2011). Uncovering indicators of effective school management in South Africa using the National School Effectiveness

Study.Stellenbosch Economic Working Papers 10/11, 1-51. [NSES]• Van der Berg, S., Burger, C., Burger, R., de Vos, M., du Rand, G., Gustafsson, M., Shepherd, D., Spaull, N., Taylor, S., van

Broekhuizen, H., and von Fintel, D. (2011). Low quality education as a poverty trap. Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch, Department of Economics. Research report for the PSPPD project for Presidency.

32

www.nicspaull.com/researchnicholasspaull@gmail.com

@NicSpaull

33

34

Description of levels

Range on 500 point scale

Skills

Level 1Pre-reading < 373

Matches words and pictures involving concrete concepts and everyday objects. Follows short simple written instructions.

Level 2Emergent reading 373 414

Matches words and pictures involving prepositions and abstract concepts; uses cuing systems (by sounding out, using simple sentence structure, and familiar words) to interpret phrases by reading on.

Level 3Basic reading

414 457

Interprets meaning (by matching words and phrases, completing a sentence, or matching adjacent words) in a short and simple text by reading on or reading back.

Level 4Reading for meaning 457 509

Reads on or reads back in order to link and interpret information located in various parts of the text.

Level 5Interpretive reading 509 563

Reads on and reads back in order to combine and interpret information from various parts of the text in association with external information (based on recalled factual knowledge) that “completes” and contextualizes meaning.

Level 6Inferential reading 563 618

Reads on and reads back through longer texts (narrative, document or expository) in order to combine information from various parts of the text so as to infer the writer’s purpose.

Level 7 Analytical reading 618 703

Locates information in longer texts (narrative, document or expository) by reading on and reading back in order to combine information from various parts of the text so as to infer the writer’s personal beliefs (value systems, prejudices, and/or biases).

Level 8Critical reading

703+

Locates information in a longer texts (narrative, document or expository) by reading on and reading back in order to combine information from various parts of the text so as to infer and evaluate what the writer has assumed about both the topic and the characteristics of the reader – such as age, knowledge, and personal beliefs (value systems, prejudices, and/or biases).

Source: (Hungi, et al., 2010)

[1] See Ross et al. (2005, p. 95).

35

Description of levels Range on 500 point scale

Skills

Level 1Pre-numeracy < 364

Applies single step addition or subtraction operations. Recognizes simple shapes. Matches numbers and pictures. Counts in whole numbers.

Level 2Emergent numeracy

364 462

Applies a two-step addition or subtraction operation involving carrying, checking (through very basic estimation), or conversion of pictures to numbers. Estimates the length of familiar objects. Recognizes common two-dimensional shapes.

Level 3Basic numeracy

462 532

Translates verbal information presented in a sentence, simple graph or table using one arithmetic operation in several repeated steps. Translates graphical information into fractions. Interprets place value of whole numbers up to thousands. Interprets simple common everyday units of measurement.

Level 4Beginning numeracy

532 587

Translates verbal or graphic information into simple arithmetic problems. Uses multiple different arithmetic operations (in the correct order) on whole numbers, fractions, and/or decimals.

Level 5Competent numeracy

587 644

Translates verbal, graphic, or tabular information into an arithmetic form in order to solve a given problem. Solves multiple-operation problems (using the correct order of arithmetic operations) involving everyday units of measurement and/or whole and mixed numbers. Converts basic measurement units from one level of measurement to another (for example, metres to centimetres).

Level 6Mathematically skilled

644 720

Solves multiple-operation problems (using the correct order of arithmetic operations) involving fractions, ratios, and decimals. Translates verbal and graphic representation information into symbolic, algebraic, and equation form in order to solve a given mathematical problem. Checks and estimates answers using external knowledge (not provided within the problem).

Level 7 Concrete problem solving 720 806

Extracts and converts (for example, with respect to measurement units) information from tables, charts, visual and symbolic presentations in order to identify, and then solves multi-step problems.

Level 8Abstract problem solving > 806

Identifies the nature of an unstated mathematical problem embedded within verbal or graphic information, and then translate this into symbolic, algebraic, or equation form in order to solve the problem.

Source: (Hungi, et al., 2010)

[1] See (Ross, et al., 2005, p. 95).

36

Teacher knowledge...

Q6: 53% correct (D)

Q9: 24% correct (C)English Q9: 57% correct (D)