ABC, in a news article yesterday, quoted Trump from January saying about Mexico “We send them practically nothing and Mexico is the new China. I hate to say it. The Mexican leaders are so much smarter than our leaders.” There is so much wrong with that statement that it’s hard to know where to start. But it’s even more ironic given the recent news out of Mexico about President Peña Nieto plagiarizing almost one-third of his law thesis.
Here’s the Huffington Post on the scandal, “Of the 682 paragraphs that made up the 200-page thesis, titled ‘Mexican Presidentialism and Alvaro Obregon,’ 197, or 28.9 percent, were found to be plagiarized. In a statement, government spokesman Eduardo Sanchez sought to play down the accusation of plagiarism, instead calling the omissions “style errors.” He added that Peña Nieto met all the requirements needed to graduate as a lawyer from Panamerican University.”
I love the government spokesman’s excuse.* I’ve only seen bits and pieces but as a professor with a lot of experience (unfortunately) of spotting plagiarism, I can assure you that we are not talking about “style errors.” Nice try though. I wonder what the higher-up at Panamerican University think about Sanchez’s last statement now that the plagiarism has been revealed!
Compare that to Obama’s educational pedigree (from Wikipedia): “Obama is a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School, where he was president of the Harvard Law Review. He was a community organizer in Chicago before earning his law degree. He worked as a civil rights attorney and taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School between 1992 and 2004.”
Now education does not necessarily equal smarts, but Peña Nieto was not exactly very smart in hiding his plagiarism**, so I’d have to give Obama the big advantage between the two.
*To his credit, he has had a lot to deal with lately (click here for the most recent corruption scandal that EPN is facing)
*See this story in the Atlantic for some examples. Perhaps my favorite part is the fact that EPN plagiarized a former Mexican president, Miguel de la Madrid. lol you can’t make this stuff up.
Thanks to @ali_naka for this gem from Zimbabwe. Here is a photo of at least one Zim school that could badly use some funding:
and here is a photo of Cabinet Ministers’ Benzes:
Maybe they could hold small tutorials in the air conditioned cars!
One of my favorite former students, Priscilla Gomes, is now working as a technical adviser to PASEC in Senegal. PASEC stands for Programme for the Analysis of Education Systems and, amongst other things, it has just published an assessment of primary education in 10 Francophone Sub-Saharan Countries (Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Chad,Congo,Côte d’Ivoire,Niger,Senegal andTogo). It was quite an undertaking, involving about 40,000 students and almost 2,000 schools.
Here is an executive summary of what they found, entitled “Education System Performance in Francophone Sub-Saharan Africa: Competencies and Learning factors in primary education.” The summary is worth checking out in full because the results are really interesting. What most caught my eye though was some good news about a country that has seen very little good news of late: Burundi.
Overall, the study found that “70% of early primary pupils are below the “suficient” threshold in language” in these 10 countries. Burundi stands out in two ways:
- “the language of the test, which is also the language of instruction (Kirundi) is familiar to pupils, and
- almost eight in ten pupils achieve the “suficient” threshold in language, and seven in ten pupils achieve the mathematics threshold.
The results also show that student results in language and math are highly correlated. That is, “whatever the country, pupils and schools that are successful in language achieve high scores in mathematics, and vice-versa.”
I have always found the language of instruction to be an interesting issue in human capital formation. One of my earliest articles studied differences in economic development across British and French former colonies in Sub-Saharan Africa. I found that ex-British colonies tended to have higher levels of education and hypothesized that it might be because British colonial policy was to train native educators to teach in the local vernacular.
Wow. This is a weird story. EPN and the PRI have actually outfoxed the great majority of the unionized teachers in Mexico. One of his major initiatives for education reform was teacher evaluations (by way of written tests) that would form a basis for getting rid of “bad” teachers. The teachers union CNTE was dead set against this and vowing to fight/protest/disrupt the recent national elections.
So the PRI suspended the testing process in the lead up to the elections, only to reinstate it the week after the elections occurred without significant disruptions.
OK, well played, EPN, right? The CNTE shoulda known better, they’d spent decades in the PRI camp and had to know what EPN’s word was worth.
Not so fast.
This week, the government announced that teacher testing was re-suspended in Oaxaca and MIchoacan, two states with fairly radicalized branches of CNTE. Here’s Robin on the state of the Oaxacan teacher’s union.
I wonder what happens now? Will the Government just write off Oaxaca and use the test to bludgeon teachers in the other 30 states? Will the “radicals” end up bringing down the whole process?
However it turns out, I still marvel that the Mexican people have put the PRI back in power and kept them there in the recent mid-terms.
The Catholic Church performs a nation-wide exorcism on the country of Mexico. Seriously, I’m not making this up. The Pope offended the Mexican government in February when he expressed his hope that “his homeland Argentina could avoid “Mexicanization.” The Pope apologized, saying that no offense was intended (ha!). And now this. I wonder how offended the government is now that the Church thinks the whole country needs to be exorcised from its demons. Here are a couple of my favorite parts of the report:
“This isn’t the first time the Catholic Church has tried to mitigate violence in Central America.” Um, the writer does know that Mexico isn’t in Central America, right?
“The church, however, knew the ritual wouldn’t change the country in a single day. ‘It would be a big mistake to think that by performing a full scale exorcism of the country everything would automatically change right away,’ Father Fortea said.” Got to cover your bases, that’s for sure. No use promising miracles or anything.
In other LOL news:
(1) The Mexican President assures the people that the country has never had a dictatorship. I wonder how hard it was to say that with a straight face. And I wonder how dumb they think the public is. Maybe the Church should give EPN an exorcism while they’re at it.
(2) the state of Oaxaca has gone back on their promise to not pay striking teachers for the weeks that they were on strike. EPN’s Education reforms seem to be fully on track.
Robin and I are supporters of low-cost private schools in developing countries ever since reading Tooley’s incredible “The Beautiful Tree”.
So I was both happy and saddened to see this awesome paper by Lant Pritchett and Yamini Aiyar, called Value Subtraction in Public Sector Production: Accounting vs. Economic Cost of Primary Schooling in India.
It turns out that the median public school spent 14,600 rupees per pupil in 2011-12, while the median private school cost around 6,000 per pupil. In other words, Public schools require twice as much resources to deliver a year of education that the private sector. When you consider how many school kids there are in India, that is quite a large amount of “wasted” resources.
But the story gets weirder, because private school kids learn more than public school kids! Lant and Yamini use test scores to create an amount learned metric and then show that given the structure of public schools, it would cost almost 30,000 rupees per pupil to get their learning up to the level enjoyed by the private school kids (which is achieved at a cost of only 6,000 per pupil).
Now any of my grad students reading this will be yelling “selection bias” at their screens at this point.
The paper acknowledges the issue:
“we don’t adjust for student selection effects and hence our estimates are not estimates of “true” learning productivity effects across the two sectors. It is obvious that if higher socio- economic status of a child’s household is associated with better learning outcomes (and it typically is) and if children in private schools are more likely to be from higher socio- economic status (and they typically are) then the differences in costs and learning outcomes reflects both higher productivity of private schools and the demographic composition of students.”
and argues from other studies that the composition effect can account for something between 20 and 60 percent of the observed gaps in public / private outcomes.