Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorTreviño, Ernesto
dc.contributor.authorÓrdenes, Miguel
dc.contributor.authorUNESCO Institute for Statistics
dc.date.accessioned2017-11-29T13:14:06Z
dc.date.available2017-11-29T13:14:06Z
dc.date.issued2017-11
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorio.minedu.gob.pe/handle/MINEDU/5673
dc.description.abstractThe global leaders of our world set 17 Sustainable Development Goals to improve the quality of people’s lives everywhere by 2030. In the context of the knowledge society, achieving the Sustainable Development Goal in education - Goal 4 thereafter SDG4 - seems critical to fulfill the overarching objective of this global agenda. SDG4 aims to promote inclusive and equitable access to quality education as well as to the promotion of development opportunities for all children and youth. Indicator 4.1.1 operationalizes this goal as the demand to “ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable, and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes” (UNESCO, 2016a, p. 7). The international community agreed upon measuring the progress of this target as the percentage of children and youth achieving a minimal level of competency in literacy and numeracy in three points over time and by sex: (a) in Grades 2/3; (b) at the end of primary; and (c) at the end of lower secondary. This paper aims to inform the debate on the possibilities and limitations of developing a global assessment strategy of Indicator 4.1.1, considering both the technical and political dimensions of cross-national assessments. In doing so, we compare different international, regional assessments, and foundational skills assessments of literacy and numeracy, provide the criteria to make comparison across assessments, address the comparability of all assessments analyzed, and identify the commonalities across assessments to explore the possibilities of linking assessments to measuring Indicator 4.1.1 and recommend strategies about process. Following this analysis, we discuss the implications of agreeing on a common definition of a minimal level of competency at the global scale. Here, we dive into the political intricacies of creating a common definition of the concept of “minimal competency” in reference to a broad variety of education realities between countries. Finally, we suggest four strategies oriented to measure Indicator 4.1.1 at a global scale, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages from both a technical and a political perspective.es_ES
dc.formatapplication/pdfes_ES
dc.language.isoenes_ES
dc.publisherUNESCOes_ES
dc.relation.ispartofseriesInformation Paper;48
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES
dc.sourceMINISTERIO DE EDUCACIÓNes_ES
dc.sourceRepositorio institucional - MINEDUes_ES
dc.subjectObjetivos de Desarrollo Sosteniblees_ES
dc.subjectCalidad de la educaciónes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación de la educaciónes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación internacionales_ES
dc.subjectDiseño curriculares_ES
dc.subjectIndicadores educativoses_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación PISAes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación PIRLSes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación LANAes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación TIMSSes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación LLECEes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación PASECes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación PILNAes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación SEA-PLMes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación SACMEQes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación ASERes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación EGMAes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación EGRAes_ES
dc.subjectEvaluación UWEZOes_ES
dc.subjectAcceso a la educación
dc.titleExploring Commonalities and Differences in Regional and International Assessmentses_ES
dc.typeReporte técnicoes_ES


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record