Tensiones público-privado y el diseño de los sistemas educativos: ¿Qué nos dice PISA?

Autores

Palavras-chave:

Financiamiento de la educación. Privatización. Elección escolar. Vouchers, . Educación pública

Resumo

Los diversos sistemas educativos en el mundo persiguen objetivos tanto públicos como privados. Específicamente, deben intentar conciliar el permitir mayor libertad para que las escuelas puedan responder a los objetivos privados de las familias con preservar un modelo educacional que entregue una experiencia educacional colectiva para mantener una sociedad cohesionada. Usando datos de PISA 2009, este trabajo examina de forma exploratoria las posibles implicancias que tendría el tipo de financiamiento y tipo de provisión (pública o privada) en el logro de los siguientes cuatro objetivos que han sido planteados para la educación: (a) libertad de elección, (b) eficiencia productiva, (c) equidad, y (d) cohesión social. En términos generales, se encuentra que existen tensiones en el logro de objetivos privados y públicos de forma simultánea. Sin embargo, existen algunas políticas públicas que logran reducir estas tensiones, mientras que otras tienden a incrementarla.

Abstract:

Educational systems around the world pursue both public and private objectives. They are able to balance both objectives by allowing greater freedom for schools to meet the families’ private objectives with an educational model that delivers a collective experience that maintains a cohesive society. Using data from PISA 2009, this study explores the possible implications that public and private funding and provision have on the following four objectives of education: (a) freedom of choice, (b) productive efficiency, (c) equity, and (d) social cohesion. We find that there are tensions in achieving some of these objectives simultaneously. However, there are some policies that reduce some of these tensions, while others tend to exacerbate them.

Key words: Educational finance. Privatization. School choice. Vouchers. Public education

 

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Biografia do Autor

Gregory Elacqua, Universidad Diego Portales

This is information that was supplied by Gregory Elacqua in registering through RePEc. If you are Gregory Elacqua , you may change this information at the RePEc Author Service. Or if you are not registered and would like to be listed as well, register at the RePEc Author Service. When you register or update your RePEc registration, you may identify the papers and articles you have authored.

Matías Martínez, Universidad Diego Portales

Magíster en Políticas Públicas, Universidad de Chile. Ingeniero Comercial, Universidad de Chile. Áreas de Interés: Políticas Educacionales.

Humberto Santos, Universidad Diego Portales

Magíster en Economía, Universidad de Chile. Ingeniero Comercial, Universidad de Chile.

Referências

BENVENISTA, L.; CARNOY, M.; ROTHSTEIN, R. All Else Equal, Are Public and Private Schools Different? N.York: RoutledgeFalmer, 2003.

COLEMAN, J. Choice, community, and future schools. En: CLUNE, W. H.; WITTE, J. (Ed). Choice and Control in American Education, London: Falmer Press, 1990. v. 1: The theory of choice and control in education.

CORVALÁN, J.; ELACQUA, G.; SALAZAR, F. El sector particular subvencionado en Chile.Tipologización y perspectivas frente a las nuevas regulaciones. Santiago de Chile: Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo de la Educación, Universidad Alberto Hurtado y Centro de Políticas Comparadas de Educación, Universidad Diego Portales, 2009. Informe final Proyecto FONIDE N° 69.

DURU-BELLAT, M. Organisation and Context, Efficiency and Equity of Educational Systems: what PISA tells us. European Educational Research Journal, Oxford, v. 4, n. 3, p. 181-194, 2005.

ELACQUA, G. The Impact of School Choice and Public Policy on Segregation: Evidence from Chile. International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, oct. 2009.

ELACQUA, G.; MOSQUEIRA, U.; SANTOS, H. La toma de decisiones de un sostenedor: análisis a partir de la Ley SEP. Foco Educación – Universidad Diego Portales, Santiago, Chile, n. 1, 2009. Disponible en: <http://www.expansiva.cl/publicaciones/en_foco_edu>. Aceso en: 30 de Julio 2009.

FRIEDMAN, M. Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.

FULLER, B. The Political Square, Big or Small? Charter Schools in Political Context. En: FULLER, B (Ed.). Inside Charter Schools: The Paradox of Radical Decentralization.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000.

GREEN, A.; PRESTON, J. Education and Social Cohesion: Recentering the Debate. Peabody Journal of Education, v. 76, n. 3-4, p. 247-284, 2001.

HAYNEMAN, S. International Perspectives on School choice. En: BERENDS, M; SPRINGER, M; BALLOU, D; WALBERG, H (Ed). Handbook of research on school choice, Londres: Routledge, 2009.

HOXBY, C. Does Competition Among Public Schools Benefit Students and Taxpayers? American Economic Review, v. 90, n. 5, p. 1209-1238, 2000.

HOXBY, C. School Choice and School Productivity (Or Could School Choice Be a Raising Tide that Lift All Boats?). En: HOXBY, C. The Economics of School Choice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003.

HSIEH, C. T.; URQUIOLA, M. When Schools Compete, How do They Compete? An Assessment of Chile’s Nationwide School Voucher Program. NBER Working Papers 10008, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 2003. JENKINS, S. P.; MICKLEWRIGHT, J.; SCHNEPF, S. V. Social Segregation in Secondary Schools: How Does England Compare with Other Countries? Oxford Review of Education, v. 34, n. 1, p. 21-37, 2008.

JENSON, J. Mapping Social Cohesion: The State of Canadian Research. Ottawa, Canadá: Renouf Publishing, 1998.

KARSTEN, S.; FELIX, C.; LEDOUX, G.; MEIJNEN, W.; ROELEVELD, J. et al. Choosing Segregation or Integration?: The Extent and Effects of Ethnic Segregation in Dutch Cities. Education and Urban Society, v. 38 , n.2, p. 228-247, 2006.

KAZTMAN, R.; RETAMOSO, A. Segregación espacial, empleo y pobreza en Montevideo. Revista de la CEPAL, n. 85, 2005.

LADD, H.; FISKE, E. The Dutch Experience with Weighted Student Funding: Some Lessons for the US. Working Paper Series SAN09-03, Durham NC: Sanford School of Public Policy Duke University, 2009.

LEVIN, H. Educational Vouchers: Effectiveness, Choice, and Costs. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, v. 17, n. 3, p. 373-392, 1998.

LEVIN, H. The Public-Private Nexus in Education. American Behavoiral Scientist, v. 43, n. 1, p. 124-137, 1999.

LEVIN, H. A Comprehensive Framework for Evaluating Educational Vouchers. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analisis, v. 24, n. 3, p. 159-174, 2002.

LEVINSON M.; LEVINSON, S. Getting religion: Religion, Diversity, and Community in Public and Private Schools. En: WOLFE, A. (Ed.). School Choice: The Moral Debate. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003.

ORGANISATION for Economic Co-operation and Development. School Factors Related to Quality and Equity Results from PISA 2000. París: OECD Publishing, 2005 .

PÕDER, K. Welfare State and School Choice: Evidence of Recent Developments in EU. En: ESCUELA EUROPEA SOBRE LA NUEVA ECONOMÍA INSTITUCIONAL, 10., 2011. Córcega, Francia. RAVITCH, D. The Death and Life of the Great American School System. N. York: Basic Books, 2010.

ROMÁN, M. Alza del SIMCE: la cosecha de la ley SEP. El Mostrador,Chile,17 abr. 2011. Disponible en: <http://www.elmostrador.cl/opinion/2011/04/17/alza-del-simcela-cosecha-de-la-ley-sep/>. Aceso en: 16 de julio 2011.

SCHNEIDER, M.; TESKE, P.; MARSCHALL, M. Choosing schools: Consumer Choice and the Quality of American Schools. Nueva Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2000.

SUGARMAN, S. School Choice and Public Funding. En: SUGARMAN, S.; KEMERER, F. School Choice and Social Controversy: Politics, Policy, and Law. Washington D. C.: Brookings Institution, 1999.

VITERITTI, J. Defining Equity: Politics, Markets and Public Policy. En: WOLFE, A. School Choice: The Moral Debate. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003.

WOESSMANN, L. Public-Private Partnerships and Schooling Outcomes across Countries.CESifo Working Paper No. 1662, Munich, 2006.

Downloads

Publicado

2016-01-12

Como Citar

ELACQUA, G.; MARTÍNEZ, M.; SANTOS, H.; URBINA, D. Tensiones público-privado y el diseño de los sistemas educativos: ¿Qué nos dice PISA?. Pro-Posições, Campinas, SP, v. 23, n. 2, p. 105–123, 2016. Disponível em: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/proposic/article/view/8642890. Acesso em: 6 fev. 2023.

Edição

Seção

Dossiê