education quality essay

UNICEF Data : Monitoring the situation of children and women

GOAL 4: QUALITY EDUCATION

Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.

Goal 4 aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.  This goal supports the reduction of disparities and inequities in education, both in terms of access and quality. It recognizes the need to provide quality education for all, and most especially vulnerable populations, including poor children, children living in rural areas, persons with disabilities, indigenous people and refugee children.

This goal is of critical importance because of its transformative effects on the other SDGs. Sustainable development hinges on every child receiving a quality education. When children are offered the tools to develop to their full potential, they become productive adults ready to give back to their communities and break the cycle of poverty. Education enables upward socioeconomic mobility.

Significant progress was achieved during the last decade in increasing access to education and school enrolment rates at all levels, particularly for girls. Despite these gains, about 260 million children were out of school in 2018, nearly one fifth of the global population in that age group. Furthermore, more than half of all children and adolescents worldwide are failing to meet minimum proficiency standards in reading and mathematics.

UNICEF’s contribution towards reaching this goal centres on equity and inclusion to provide all children with quality learning opportunities and skills development programmes, from early childhood through adolescence. UNICEF works with governments worldwide to raise the quality and inclusiveness of schools.  

UNICEF is custodian for global monitoring of Indicator 4.2.1 Percentage of children (aged 24–59 months) developmentally on track in at least 3 of the 4 following domains: literacy-numeracy, physical, socio-emotional and learning.

Child-related SDG indicators

Target 4.1 by 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes.

Proportion of children and young people: (a) in grades 2/3; (b) at the end of primary; and (c) at the end of lower secondary achieving at least a minimum proficiency level in (i) reading and (ii) mathematics, by sex

• Indicator definition
• Computation method
• Comments & limitations

Explore the data

The indicator aims to measure the percentage of children and young people who have achieved the minimum learning outcomes in reading and mathematics during or at the end of the relevant stages of education.

The higher the figure, the higher the proportion of children and/or young people reaching at least minimum proficiency in the respective domain (reading or mathematic) with the limitations indicated under the “Comments and limitations” section.

The indicator is also a direct measure of the learning outcomes achieved in the two subject areas at the end of the relevant stages of education. The three measurement points will have their own established minimum standard. There is only one threshold that divides students into above and below minimum:

Below minimum refers to the proportion or percentage of students who do not achieve a minimum standard as set up by countries according to the globally-defined minimum competencies.

Above minimum refers to the proportion or percentage of students who have achieved the minimum standards. Due to heterogeneity of performance levels set by national and cross-national assessments, these performance levels will have to be mapped to the globally-defined minimum performance levels. Once the performance levels are mapped, the global education community will be able to identify for each country the proportion or percentage of children who achieved minimum standards.

(a) Minimum proficiency level (MPL) is the benchmark of basic knowledge in a domain (mathematics, reading, etc.) measured through learning assessments. In September 2018, an agreement was reached on a verbal definition of the global minimum proficiency level of reference for each of the areas and domains of Indicator 4.1.1 as described in the document entitled: Minimum Proficiency Levels (MPLs): Outcomes of the consensus building meeting ( http://gaml.uis.unesco.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2019/02/MPLs_revised_doc_20190204.docx ).

Minimum proficiency levels (MPLs) defined by each learning assessment to ensure comparability across learning assessments; a verbal definition of MPL for each domain and levels between cross-national assessments (CNAs) were established by conducting an analysis of the performance level descriptors, the descriptions of the performance levels to express the knowledge and skills required to achieve each performance level by domain, of cross-national, regional and community-led tests in reading and mathematics. The analysis was led and completed by the UIS and a consensus among experts on the proposed methodology was deemed adequate and pragmatic.

The global MPL definitions for the domains of reading and mathematics are presented here (insert link)

The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) reading test has six proficiency levels, of which Level 2 is described as the minimum proficiency level. In Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), there are four proficiency levels: Low, Intermediate, High and Advanced. Students reaching the Intermediate benchmark are able to apply basic knowledge in a variety of situations, similar to the idea of minimum proficiency. Currently, there are no common standards validated by the international community or countries. The indicator shows data published by each of the agencies and organizations specialised in cross-national learning assessments.

(a) The number of children and/or young people at the relevant stage of education n in year t achieving at least the pre-defined proficiency level in subject s expressed as a percentage of the number of children and/or young people at stage of education n, in year t, in any proficiency level in subjects.

Harmonize various data sources To address the challenges posed by the limited capacity of some countries to implement cross- national, regional and national assessments, actions have been taken by the UIS and its partners. The strategies are used according to its level of precision and following a reporting protocol ( http://gaml.uis.unesco.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2019/05/GAML6-WD-2-Protocol-for-reporting-4.1.1_v1.pdf ) that includes the national assessments under specific circumstances.

Out-of-school children In 2016, 263 million children, adolescents and youth were out of school, representing nearly one-fifth of the global population of this age group. 63 million, or 24% of the total, are children of primary school age (typically 6 to 11 years old); 61 million, or 23% of the total, are adolescents of lower secondary school age (typically 12 to 14 years old); and 139 million, or 53% of the total, are youth of upper secondary school age (about 15 to 17 years old). Not all these kids will be permanently outside school, some will re-join the educational system and, eventually, complete late, while some of them will enter late. The quantity varies per country and region and demands some adjustment in the estimate of Indicator 4.1.1. There is currently a discussion on how to implement these adjustments to reflect all the population. In 2017, the UIS proposed to make adjustments using the out-of-school children and the completion rates.( http://uis.unesco.org/en/blog/helping-countries-improve-their-data-out-school-children ) and the completion rates.

Learning outcomes from cross-national learning assessment are directly comparable for all countries which participated in the same cross-national learning assessments. However, these outcomes are not comparable across different cross-national learning assessments or with national learning assessments. A level of comparability of learning outcomes across assessments could be achieved by using different methodologies, each with varying standard errors. The period of 2020-2021 will shed light on the standard errors’ size for these methodologies.

The comparability of learning outcomes over time has additional complications, which require, ideally, to design and implement a set of comparable items as anchors in advance. Methodological developments are underway to address comparability of assessments outcomes over time.

While data from many national assessments are available now, every country sets its own standards so the performance levels might not be comparable. One option is to link existing regional assessments based on a common framework. Furthermore, assessments are typically administered within school systems, the current indicators cover only those in school and the proportion of in-school target populations might vary from country to country due to varied out-of-school children populations. Assessing competencies of children and young people who are out of school would require household-based surveys. Assessing children in households is under consideration but may be very costly and difficult to administer and unlikely to be available on the scale needed within the next 3-5 years. Finally, the calculation of this indicator requires specific information on the ages of children participating in assessments to create globally-comparable data. The ages of children reported by the head of the household might not be consistent and reliable so the calculation of the indicator may be even more challenging. Due to the complication in assessing out-of-school children and the main focus on improving education system, the UIS is taking a stepping stone approach. It will concentrate on assessing children in school in the medium term, where much data are available, then develop more coherent implementation plan to assess out-of-school children in the longer term.

Click on the button below to explore the data behind this indicator.

Completion rate (primary education, lower secondary education, upper secondary education)

A completion rate of 100% indicates that all children and adolescents have completed a level of education by the time they are 3 to 5 years older than the official age of entry into the last grade of that level of education. A low completion rate indicates low or delayed entry into a given level of education, high drop-out, high repetition, late completion, or a combination of these factors.

Percentage of a cohort of children or young people aged 3-5 years above the intended age for the last grade of each level of education who have completed that grade.

The intended age for the last grade of each level of education is the age at which pupils would enter the grade if they had started school at the official primary entrance age, had studied full-time and had progressed without repeating or skipping a grade.

For example, if the official age of entry into primary education is 6 years, and if primary education has 6 grades, the intended age for the last grade of primary education is 11 years. In this case, 14-16 years (11 + 3 = 14 and 11 + 5 = 16) would be the reference age group for calculation of the primary completion rate.

The number of persons in the relevant age group who have completed the last grade of a given level of education is divided by the total population (in the survey sample) of the same age group.

The age group 3-5 years above the official age of entry into the last grade for a given level of education was selected for the calculation of the completion rate to allow for some delayed entry or repetition. In countries where entry can occur very late or where repetition is common, some children or adolescents in the age group examined may still attend school and the eventual rate of completion may therefore be underestimated.

The indicator is calculated from household survey data and is subject to time lag in the availability of data. When multiple surveys are available, they may provide conflicting information due to the possible presence of sampling and non-sampling errors in survey data. The Technical Cooperation Group on the Indicators for SDG 4 – Education 2030 (TCG) has requested a refinement of the methodology to model completion rate estimates, following an approach similar to that used for the estimation of child mortality rates. The model would ensure that common challenges with household survey data, such as timeliness and sampling or non-sampling errors are addressed to provide up-to-date and more robust data.

TARGET 4.2 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education

Proportion of children aged 24-59 months of age who are developmentally on track in health, learning and psychosocial well-being, by sex.

Early childhood development (ECD) sets the stage for life-long thriving. Investing in ECD is one of the most critical and cost-effective investments a country can make to improve adult health, education and productivity in order to build human capital and promote sustainable development. ECD is equity from the start and provides a good indication of national development. Efforts to improve ECD can bring about human, social and economic improvements for both individuals and societies.

The recommended measure for SDG 4.2.1 is the Early Childhood Development Index 2030 (ECDI2030) which is a 20-item instrument to measure developmental outcomes among children aged 24 to 59 months in population-based surveys. The indicator derived from the ECDI2030 is the proportion of children aged 24 to 59 months who have achieved the minimum number of milestones expected for their age group, defined as follows:

– Children age 24 to 29 months are classified as developmentally on-track if they have achieved at least 7 milestones – Children age 30 to 35 months are classified as developmentally on-track if they have achieved at least 9 milestones – Children age 36 to 41 months are classified as developmentally on-track if they have achieved at least 11 milestones – Children age 42 to 47 months are classified as developmentally on-track if they have achieved at least 13 milestones – Children age 48 to 59 months are classified as developmentally on-track if they have achieved at least 15 milestones

SDG indicator 4.2.1 is intended to capture the multidimensional and holistic nature of early childhood development. For this reason, the indicator is not intended to be disaggregated by domains since development in all areas (health, learning and psychosocial wellbeing) are interconnected and overlapping, particularly among young children. The indicator is intended to produce a single summary score to indicate the proportion of children considered to be developmentally on track.

The domains included in the indicator for SDG indicator 4.2.1 include the following concepts:

Health: gross motor development, fine motor development and self-care Learning: expressive language, literacy, numeracy, pre-writing, and executive functioning Psychosocial well-being: emotional skills, social skills, internalizing behavior, and externalizing behavior

The number of children aged 24 to 59 months who are developmentally on track in health, learning and psychosocial well-being divided by the total number of children aged 24 to 59 months in the population multiplied by 100.

SDG 4.2.1 was initially classified as Tier 3 and was upgraded to Tier 2 in 2019; additionally, changes to the indicator were made during the 2020 comprehensive review. In light of this and given that the ECDI2030 was officially released in March 2020, it will take some time for country uptake and implementation of the new measure and for data to become available from a sufficiently large enough number of countries. Therefore, in the meantime, a proxy indicator (children aged 36-59 months who are developmentally ontrack in at least three of the following four domains: literacy-numeracy, physical, social-emotional and learning) will be used to report on 4.2.1, when relevant. This proxy indicator has been used for global SDG reporting since 2015 but is not fully aligned with the definition and age group covered by the SDG indicator formulation. When the proxy indicator is used for SDG reporting on 4.2.1 for a country, it will be footnoted as such in the global SDG database.

Click on the button below to explore the data behind this indicator’s proxy; Children aged 36-59 months who are developmentally ontrack in at least three of the following four domains: literacy-numeracy, physical, social-emotional and learning . For more information about this proxy indicator, please see “Comments and Limitations”

Adjusted net attendance rate, one year before the official primary entry age

The indicator measures children’s exposure to organized learning activities in the year prior to the official age to start of primary school as a representation of access to quality early childhood care and pre-primary education. One year prior to the start of primary school is selected for international comparison. A high value of the indicator shows a high degree of participation in organized learning immediately before the official entrance age to primary education.

The participation rate in organized learning (one year before the official primary entry age), by sex as defined as the percentage of children in the given age range who participate in one or more organized learning programme, including programmes which offer a combination of education and care. Participation in early childhood and in primary education are both included. The age range will vary by country depending on the official age for entry to primary education.

An organized learning programme is one which consists of a coherent set or sequence of educational activities designed with the intention of achieving pre-determined learning outcomes or the accomplishment of a specific set of educational tasks. Early childhood and primary education programmes are examples of organized learning programmes.

Early childhood and primary education are defined in the 2011 revision of the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED 2011). Early childhood education is typically designed with a holistic approach to support children’s early cognitive, physical, social and emotional development and to introduce young children to organized instruction outside the family context. Primary education offers learning and educational activities designed to provide students with fundamental skills in reading, writing and mathematics and establish a solid foundation for learning and understanding core areas of knowledge and personal development. It focuses on learning at a basic level of complexity with little, if any, specialisation.

The official primary entry age is the age at which children are obliged to start primary education according to national legislation or policies. Where more than one age is specified, for example, in different parts of a country, the most common official entry age (i.e. the age at which most children in the country are expected to start primary) is used for the calculation of this indicator at the global level.

The number of children in the relevant age group who participate in an organized learning programme is expressed as a percentage of the total population in the same age range. From household surveys, both enrolments and population are collected at the same time.

Participation in learning programmes in the early years is not full time for many children, meaning that exposure to learning environments outside of the home will vary in intensity. The indicator measures the percentage of children who are exposed to organized learning but not the intensity of the programme, which limits the ability to draw conclusions on the extent to which this target is being achieved. More work is needed to ensure that the definition of learning programmes is consistent across various surveys and defined in a manner that is easily understood by survey respondents, ideally with complementary information collected on the amount of time children spend in learning programmes.

TARGET 4.a Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all

Proportion of schools offering basic services, by type of service.

This indicator measures the presence of basic services and facilities in school that are necessary to ensure a safe and effective learning environment for all students. A high value indicates that schools have good access to the relevant services and facilities. Ideally each school should have access to all these services and facilities.

The percentage of schools by level of education (primary education) with access to the given facility or service

Electricity: Regularly and readily available sources of power (e.g. grid/mains connection, wind, water, solar and fuel-powered generator, etc.) that enable the adequate and sustainable use of ICT infrastructure for educational purposes.

Internet for pedagogical purposes: Internet that is available for enhancing teaching and learning and is accessible by pupils. Internet is defined as a worldwide interconnected computer network, which provides pupils access to a number of communication services including the World Wide Web and carries e-mail, news, entertainment and data files, irrespective of the device used (i.e. not assumed to be only via a computer) and thus can also be accessed by mobile telephone, tablet, PDA, games machine, digital TV etc.). Access can be via a fixed narrowband, fixed broadband, or via mobile network.

Computers for pedagogical use: Use of computers to support course delivery or independent teaching and learning needs. This may include activities using computers or the Internet to meet information needs for research purposes; develop presentations; perform hands-on exercises and experiments; share information; and participate in online discussion forums for educational purposes. A computer is a programmable electronic device that can store, retrieve and process data, as well as share information in a highly-structured manner. It performs high-speed mathematical or logical operations according to a set of instructions or algorithms.

Computers include the following types: -A desktop computer usually remains fixed in one place; normally the user is placed in front of it, behind the keyboard; – A laptop computer is small enough to carry and usually enables the same tasks as a desktop computer; it includes notebooks and netbooks but does not include tablets and similar handheld devices; and – A tablet (or similar handheld computer) is a computer that is integrated into a flat touch screen, operated by touching the screen rather than using a physical keyboard.

Adapted infrastructure is defined as any built environment related to education facilities that are accessible to all users, including those with different types of disability, to be able to gain access to use and exit from them. Accessibility includes ease of independent approach, entry, evacuation and/or use of a building and its services and facilities (such as water and sanitation), by all of the building’s potential users with an assurance of individual health, safety and welfare during the course of those activities.

Adapted materials include learning materials and assistive products that enable students and teachers with disabilities/functioning limitations to access learning and to participate fully in the school environment.

Accessible learning materials include textbooks, instructional materials, assessments and other materials that are available and provided in appropriate formats such as audio, braille, sign language and simplified formats that can be used by students and teachers with disabilities/functioning limitations.

Basic drinking water is defined as a functional drinking water source (MDG ‘improved’ categories) on or near the premises and water points accessible to all users during school hours.

Basic sanitation facilities are defined as functional sanitation facilities (MDG ‘improved’ categories) separated for males and females on or near the premises.

Basic handwashing facilities are defined as functional handwashing facilities, with soap and water available to all girls and boys.

The number of schools in a given level of education with access to the relevant facilities is expressed as a percentage of all schools at that level of education.

The indicator measures the existence in schools of the given service or facility but not its quality or operational state.

For every child to learn, UNICEF has eight key asks of governments:

• A demonstration of how the SDG 4 global ambitions are being nationalized into plans, policies, budgets, data collection efforts and reports.
• A renewed commitment to education to recover learning losses and manage impacts of COVID-19.
• The implementation and scaling of digital learning solutions and innovations to reimagine education.
• Attention to skills development should be a core component to education.
• Focus to provide quality education to the most vulnerable – including girls, children affected by conflict and crisis, children with disabilities, refugees and displaced children.
• A continued commitment to improving access to pre-primary, primary and secondary education for all, including for children from minority groups and those with disabilities.
• A renewed focus on learning outcomes and their enablers, including learning in safe and adequate environments, support by well-trained teachers and structured content.
• The implementation of SDG-focused learning throughout schools to raise awareness and inspire positive action.

Learn more about  UNICEF’s key asks for implementing Goal 4

See more Sustainable Development Goals

ZERO HUNGER

GOOD HEALTH AND WELL-BEING

QUALITY EDUCATION

GENDER EQUALITY

CLEAN WATER AND SANITATION

AFFORDABLE AND CLEAN ENERGY

DECENT WORK AND ECONOMIC GROWTH

REDUCED INEQUALITIES

CLIMATE ACTION

PEACE, JUSTICE AND STRONG INSTITUTIONS

PARTNERSHIPS FOR THE GOALS

About . Click to expand section.

• Our History
• Team & Board
• Transparency and Accountability

What We Do . Click to expand section.

• Cycle of Poverty
• Climate & Environment
• Emergencies & Refugees
• Health & Nutrition
• Livelihoods
• Gender Equality
• Where We Work

Take Action . Click to expand section.

• Attend an Event
• Partner With Us
• Fundraise for Concern
• Work With Us
• Leadership Giving
• Humanitarian Training
• Newsletter Sign-Up

Donate . Click to expand section.

• Give Monthly
• Donate in Honor or Memory
• Leave a Legacy
• DAFs, IRAs, Trusts, & Stocks
• Employee Giving

What does Quality Education mean?

Breaking down Sustainable Development Goal #4

Aug 31, 2023

Education is essential for ending poverty . Actually, let's rephrase that: quality education is essential for ending poverty.

The word “quality” carries a lot of meanings—and even baggage. Especially in the US, where school rankings can be a stressful topic for both parents and students. In our work, however, quality means something very different, and very specific. This is especially true in countries where education is most under threat, and why Quality Education is one of the UN’s top Sustainable Development Goals . Read on to learn more. 

The UN defines its fourth Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) is “to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.” 

Education is important, and many areas of the world lack access to free pre-primary, primary, and secondary education — not to mention affordable options for technical, vocational, and university studies. But it’s not enough for education to be accessible. It also has to add value to the lives of the children and young adults attending school. School enrollment in Niger had gone up for primary students pre-pandemic. However, many of these students were graduating school without mastering basic skills like literacy and numeracy.

Stay in the know on our work in education

Why quality education matters.

Education can help young people break an intergenerational cycle of poverty . But this is only possible if education is approached in a meaningful way. In 2012, the UN’s former Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said:

“Education is about more than literacy and numeracy — it is also about citizenry. Education must fully assume its central role in helping people to forge more just, peaceful and tolerant societies.” 

This is what we mean by “quality” education: We need a standard to measure how effective an education is in order to set students up for success in the rest of their lives. 

How we measure Quality Education

The UN has outlined several targets within their larger education-related SDG that help us to set a standard of quality. 

1. Building relevant skills for financial success

Extreme poverty is a lack of assets or a lack of return on those assets. One of these assets are skills, including technical and vocational skills. The more relevant these skills are in the 21st Century, the more likely they are to generate a return. This not only means understanding how relevant skills have changed against the digital revolution and automation, but also against climate change, shifting societal norms, and political realities. 

2. Eliminating discrimination in education

Education is a fundamental human right. However, there are 244 million children around the world who aren’t in the classroom. Many of them are excluded due to some form of discrimination. Girls’ education is particularly under threat here, with over 129 million girls missing out on a basic human right. Quality Education means equality in education — at all levels. 

3. Universal literacy and numeracy

According to UNESCO, if all adults had just literacy and numeracy skills, an estimated 171 million people could escape extreme poverty . However, UNESCO also estimates that  there are 781 million illiterate adults around the globe. Many of these adults have completed several years of education but remain unable to read or count due to different barriers.

6 Benefits of literacy in the fight against poverty

"The future starts with the alphabet." Here are 6 benefits of literacy as a tool for breaking the cycle of poverty.

4. Inclusive and safe schools

Environment is crucial to fostering a quality education. This means building and upgrading schools that are child-friendly, disability- and gender-sensitive, and provide safe, nonviolent, and inclusive spaces for kids to learn — and to enjoy being kids. Unfortunately, both physical and psychological aggression and gender biases are still prevalent in far too many schools. 

5. Qualified teachers

One of the UN’s other main goals around education is to increase the number of qualified teachers — especially in low-income countries and remote areas around the world. While many teachers receive some form of training, it’s not always in line with the best education models, nor is it always tailored to teaching in fragile contexts. 

How Concern supports Quality Education

Concern’s work in primary education is grounded in the belief that all children have a right to learn. We believe that education is one of the best routes out of poverty and integrate it into both our development and emergency work to give children living in extreme poverty more opportunities in life and an overall sense of well-being. 

Supporting Syrian students and teachers in Lebanon and Türkiye

We’ve worked with displaced Syrian teachers, as well as local teachers in Turkish and Lebanese host communities, to develop formal and informal learning programs that support children who have been traumatized by war and displacement. We’ve also worked with Syrian adults to build relevant income-generating skills that they can use in their host communities as well as, eventually, when they return home to a country that will need help rebuilding its infrastructure, economy, and communities.

Helping girls succeed in Kenya and Malawi

Project Profile

Right to Learn

An example of finding the right partners to go even further, this education program in Malawi improved gender equality in the classroom.

In an effort to build gender equality in educational systems around the world, we’ve created programs that support retention rates from primary to secondary schools for girls in Kenya and Malawi . In Malawi, we’ve also supported community groups to prevent harmful traditions like child marriage from interrupting education (for boys and girls). Community groups like a local Village Savings and Loan Association in Kenya’s Chalbi Desert have also taken it upon themselves to financially support local girls through their primary and secondary schooling. 

Breaking language barriers in Haiti and Niger

Language barriers in the classroom: From mother tongue to national language

Learn more about how Concern programs have helped students overcome language barriers in classrooms in Haiti and Kenya.

We’ve addressed language barriers in the classroom in countries like Kenya, Niger and Haiti , where local communities often speak languages other than the national tongues (which, in and of themselves, are holdovers of colonial rule). This method is in line with UNESCO’s recommendation for early teaching in the mother tongue and gradually transitioning. 

Creating safe learning environments in Sierra Leone

Concern is working to address school-related gender-based violence (SRGBV) to align quality with equality. In Sierra Leone, our Irish Aid-funded, multi-million-dollar, five-year learning program, the Safe Learning Model, developed a holistic approach to education in the Tonkolili District, addressing SRGBV in the larger community context and creating a model that can be adapted for other countries and settings. 

Support Concern's work

More on Quality Education

11 Unexpected barriers to education around the world

Four ways that girls’ education can change the world

Child marriage and education: The blackboard wins over the bridal altar

Sign up for our newsletter.

Get emails with stories from around the world.

You can change your preferences at any time. By subscribing, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

Equality or Equity?

• Posted December 2, 2022
• By Jill Anderson
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Inequality and Education Gaps
• K-12 School Leadership
• Moral, Civic, and Ethical Education

Subscribe to the Harvard EdCast.

Longtime educator Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade thinks schools have been focused on equality for too long and need to fundamentally rethink the way they do things. He says a focus on equality is not producing the results that schools really need — providing all students with a quality education. While visiting schools many years ago, he noticed educators used the terms "equality" and "equity" interchangeably. Then, he started tracking what that actually means. The data clearly demonstrates that aiming for equality doesn't work. What would schools look like if they were, instead, truly equitable places?

In this episode of the Harvard EdCast, Duncan-Andrade reimagines what education could look like in America if we dared to break free of the system that constrains it. 

Jill Anderson:  I'm Jill Anderson. This is The Harvard EdCast. Long time educator, Jeff Duncan-Andrade, was working with schools when he noticed people using the words equality and equity interchangeably. Those words don't mean the same thing. Everybody's talking about equity without really taking the time to understand what it means, he says. And even worse, he says American schools have been more focused on equality for decades, and data shows it's not working. He's calling for a fundamental rethink of education nationwide with a real focus on equity. I wondered what that means, and what that might even look like. But I wanted Jeff to first tell us a bit more about the difference between equality and equity.

Jill Anderson: What is the difference between equity and equality? Because it seems like a lot of us are confused.

Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade: Well, so the way that I talk about equity is that I use my own home. I have twin boys that are nine years old. On virtually every measure, they're as equal is two children can be. Right? And yet, one of them when he was much younger was constantly thirsty, and the other one was constantly hungry. If I give both of them a bottle of water, is that equal? The immediate reaction of some people is to shake their head no. Then I ask the person, I say, "Why do you say it's not equal?" And then they say, "Well, because you're not giving [inaudible 00:02:35], your son who's always hungry, what he needs." And I say, "Yeah, but that's not the question I'm asking you. I'm asking you if it's equal." And then they kind of course correct. And they're like, "Well, yeah, it's equal, but it's not fair." 

What I follow up with there is to say, "Yeah. You're right." But if you look at the definition of equality, there's nothing in there about fairness. It's presumed. The problem is we're attempting to have an equal education system in the most radically unequal industrialized nation in the history of the world. So to design an equal education system is both to ignore present and historical data and real material conditions, and it basically virtually guarantees that the social reproduction of those same inequalities. And we're not even doing equal schools.

Equity, on the other hand, is about fairness. And so the definition of equity that I use is that in an equitable system, you get what you need when you need it. This requires schools to first really assess: What do the children and the families in the community that we serve actually need? So you can't carbon copy. You can't just say, "Well, this worked over here in this community, and they have a really similar demographic profile, so we'll just copy this over." You can't McDonald-ize it. Right? And that requires, one, a lot of institutional dexterity, which schools really don't have right now. It requires dexterity around resource allocation. And it requires a very different kind of questioning and wondering and thinking and teacher support and teacher development, which schools really don't have right now.

And that's why I said that if we were going to really pursue an equitable education system, it requires us to make a hard pivot. And I think the hard pivot begins first with the purpose question, which I don't hear us asking in this country. And the purpose question is: For what? Why do we take children by law from their families for 13 consecutive years, for seven hours a day? Why are we doing that? And because we don't reexamine the why, the purpose, then what we end up doing is effectively putting lipstick on the pig. Public schools are presumed good in this society. I want us to challenge that.

Jill Anderson: I was looking around and I read an interview with you from many years ago where you said, and I'm quoting, "We lack the public will to transform our public schools."

Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade: I do think we lack the public will, and it's particularly disconcerting to me right now because I felt like coming back from the pandemic that we had a real opportunity. I felt like the potential for the will was there. People were really willing to rethink a lot of stuff. And what happened was that window has largely closed and what happened was that schools really went back to business as usual, even though they were saying, "We can't go back to business as usual." If you go to schools today, they look exactly like they did before the pandemic, excepting that you'll see more masks, you'll see more hand sanitizer, and you'll see occasional group testing for COVID. That's it. Everything else looks literally identical, the design of the school day, the curriculum, the set up off the classrooms, totally blew the opportunity to do a fundamental rethink.

In order to do a real rethink, you have to have resources. And I think that one of the things that gets in our way is that people don't really know what happens in schools. And so their kid gets dropped off, they come home. How was your day? It was good. Continue on. Right? And so we really want to re-jigger this whole thing. So I think that, one, we have to raise the national consciousness about what is actually happening in schools, and raise the national consciousness and awareness about the fact that, one, schools are really not good for kids the way we've designed them. Our children are not well. I'm not talking about just vulnerable and wounded kids, poor and working class kids, kids of color. I'm talking about the national data set on youth wellness is deeply, deeply troubling. And it's reflected in our larger public health data outcome.

I mean, we are the least well of any of the industrialized nations, and it's not even close. And yet, we spend by some estimates 100 X as much on healthcare as the next closest industrialized nation, which actually makes some sense because: When do you need healthcare? When you're sick. We have a national crisis, public health crisis, that public health officials have been banging the drum about for quite a while. And it can be directly connected to the way in which we organize our school day, and the experiences of our children over those 13 years. You can only ride this ride for so long before slamming on your brakes doesn't prevent you from careening off the edge of the cliff. And if you really look at the data, and I'm talking about our economic data, I'm talking about our health data, I'm talking about our broader social data, it's really, really troubling. We're in trouble.

This sits right up there with the climate crisis. If we correct the climate and the ozone layer, that doesn't mean we're going to be well. So I think that we have to raise the national awareness and consciousness about the place we're in as a society. And then we have to follow that by saying that it doesn't have to be this way. This is a choice that we can make, and the good thing that may be different than the climate crisis is that we could literally course correct this in one generation. If you had a generation of children that experienced in the public school system for all those 13 years and all those hours, a singular focus on wellness, to me, that is the purpose of public schools in a pluralistic multiracial democracy, is a promise to every family that when you give us your child, when you come back at the end of the day, they will be more well for having spent time with us than when you dropped them off. That's it.

So you can teach reading, you can teach writing, you can teach math, you can teach science, you can do sports, you can do art, you can do dance, you can do all of those things. But the question is: For what? If it's the model that we've designed, which is to maintain social inequality without social unrest, and to create pathways into employment, then carry on. If the goal is a pluralistic multiracial democracy that is more equal and more equitable, then we have to rethink the role of public schools in growing a generation of young people that know that is the agenda of our society.

Jill Anderson: Do you think that the intent was never really to make anything better? Is it just a Band-Aid? 

Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade: We have an allergy in this country to truth telling. And I think without real truth telling, then the consciousness won't emerge. And I think that there's a fear in the broader society that: If we change schools, if we really do what you're saying, Jeff, if we really change schools, what if it's worse? Better the devil you know, right? Again, this goes back to people don't really know what happens in schools. The fear is I don't want to experiment on kids. Right? And what people don't process in that statement is we're already experimenting on kids. And we have an incredible amount of data on how that experiment is going, and it is failing, flat out. 

And it's not that things have been slow to change. Things are worse. We're headed in the wrong direction. The wealth gap in this society is far and away the biggest it's ever been. Health outcomes, wellness is far and away the worst it's ever been. The forms of inequality that we can track, even economists are freaking out. They are really concerned. So for me, the question is one: Why aren't people putting that picture together? Why aren't more leaders talking about that? I'm an imminently hopeful dude. I firmly believe we're going to figure this out. But I don't think that you can really close your eyes and pray your way out of this. I was looking for what's the kind of big, global gold standard data set for looking at this in nations, and what I stumbled upon is called the World Peace Index. 

That is the global gold standard for measuring peace, democracy, economic stability and sustainability in 99.8 of the world's population. So I figured when I started looking at this in 2015, and this is used by the United Nations, UNESCO, by the World Health ... I mean, this is a widely accepted kind of mega index to look at how our nation's doing. And when I first looked at it, I figured we're top 20, some of the Nordic countries will probably outpace us. But in 2015, I think we were 94th.

Jill Anderson: Wow.

Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade:  And my jaw dropped. I was like, "Whoa." Right? And then I kept tracking it every year, and every year since 2015, we have dropped and dropped and dropped. The '22 index just came out, and I think now we're 122nd in the world. That is such an indictment of the maintenance model that we're hanging onto, the devil that we know. And we're in a free fall. And I think schools are ... If we're going to do a fundamental rethink about schools, we have to really have a coming to truth, as South Africa did. We have to have a truth and reconciliation conversation about: Where are we? How did we get here? What sets of decisions did we make to get here? And then how are we going to course correct? Right? How are we going to raise a generation of young people that experience truth telling about what this society is? And then let's create school systems that are really developing young people that are problem solvers, whether it's for cancer, whether it's for the climate crisis, and schools are not that.

Schools are about compliance, internalize, regurgitate, repeat. That model at some level made some sense when we first started schools because schools were designed to create functional workers for factories. We're not that anymore. And I think that's why so many young people find school completely inane and obsolete.

Jill Anderson: Are there any schools that you would say are equitable today, are practicing that kind of model? 

Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade: Whole schools, none that I've seen. I think some are more committed to it than others. There is incredible research and examples of spaces and places where it's happening inside of schools, so individual classrooms, or individual programs. But tip to finish, edge to edge, top to bottom, I have not seen it in a US school. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. But I think that is one of the questions that we have to solve for. There has to be a major influx of resources to begin to create the space for schools to innovate, to begin to figure out. How do we stop moving deck chairs around on a Titanic and calling it different? And how do we start really thinking about remaking the ship? And schools are not given the runway or the resources to be innovative.

You saw that coming out of the pandemic. All these superintendents were like, "Yeah. You're giving me this crisis money right now, but I can't build anything long-term with this because you're going to take it away. And then I'm going to have to cut that, and the damage that does both to staffing and to the climate and culture of a community is bad." I'm immediately adjacent to Silicon Valley. And I've had the privilege of spending quite a bit of time with some of the leaders of some of the largest companies there. And to a person, when I'm in those conversations with them, one of the things that they have all said to me at some point or another is that one of our most valuable commodities as a corporation is failure. And I was like, "Huh?" 

And then I started thinking about how in education. We duck, dodge, and deny failure like it is the worst thing ever. And the more I explored that with them, the more I understood just how different the consciousness, the climate, and the culture has to be for a space to be innovative, the goal isn't to fail, but the known is if we're going to push the envelope, if we're going to innovate, if we're going to try and really do things that are cutting edge and different, we're going to fail, and we're going to fail a lot. And the key is not that you start worrying about failure, but that you build an infrastructure around the failure, so that you're learning and you're growing.

What schools try to do is they try to do mega change, so the whole school's going to do X, Y, or Z. The whole district's going to do X, Y, or Z. And that consistently falls flat on its face because one, that's not how you do institutional change. The only way that you pull that off is with power. You just force people. But no one actually changes, they just comply. But if you want to change, you have to start with smaller units. You have to have good R and D. And you have to innovate and tweak constantly. You can't wait for a semester to get test scores back and decide if your literacy program needs improvement. You can't wait for a year. There's a whole lot of spaces and places that we could be learning from in education about how to make this move in a way that is actually creating transformation and change that's healthy, that's good for kids, that's good for teachers, that's good for families. 

Jill Anderson: So in an equitable school model, do you think that it's just every school, every classroom, will really look different?

Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade: I think it depends on how you operationalize the term different. Every classroom you go into right now looks different. Whether you want to admit it or not, it is a different teacher, a different group of kids. So there's a way in which there's a cold comfort in the kind of fast food approach to schools, which is I'm going to go in and I'm going to see a teacher in front of the room, and I'm going to see desks organized. I'm going to see kids seated and calm. And I'm going to see important stuff on the walls, and kids are going to be raising their hand. And I think that we have to let go of that. The classrooms that I know where real learning is happening are on fire. And people are like, "Whoa, this is chaos."

But when you look at what actually comes out of that classroom, it's super investment. Kids are super excited. The teacher's super excited. And lots and lots of learning is happening. So part of the national consciousness has to change in giving people live look ins to: What are we actually talking about here? What should we expect to see when we walk in classrooms? What that looks like day to day and room A to room B, it needs to look a little bit different based on who's in there and what they're doing in the particular moment. 

What I think shouldn't be different is the core values. So pedagogically, you're going to see some difference. Curriculum, you're going to see some difference. Interactions, you're going to see some difference. But when you kind of zoom out a little bit and you look at what are the core values that are happening right here, no, we've actually known this again for 40 years from the research. The most effective teachers across four decades of research pretty much do the same things. And no matter what the political climate of the day is, or what the sexy curriculum or assessment is, they are doing pretty much the same things. What we've been calling the kind of new three Rs, but they're not new, they're the old three Rs, that is widely supported by the research not just in education, but across all those fields about what actually creates wellbeing and investment from children.

First and foremost, it's relationships. Right? So if you walked into classroom A or classroom B, what you would see is deep, caring relationships between the adult and the children, and between the children and the children. The second thing is relevance. You walk into the space and you would see kids on fire about learning because they actually care about what they're learning. Right? It's relevant to their life. It's relevant to their history. It's relevant to their language. It's relevant to their community. If you went space to space, that might look a little different because what's relevant to group A might be a little different than what's relevant to group B. But you could still hit all the state and national standards with a modified curriculum.

And then the third thing is the space would reflect responsibility, a responsibility to themselves, a responsibility to the school, a responsibility to the community, a responsibility to the nation, a responsibility to the world. Part of that responsibility would be that if a child is wounded, that we don't punt. We don't send them away. We don't make them somebody else's problem. The classroom community would be responding and understanding that is education. Learning your responsibility to your brother or your sister that's sitting next to you, and saying that we can teach all the standards we need to teach with a focus on wellness and care. That's not going to stop you from reading.

In fact, that's actually going to increase reading. But what happens right now is because we're trying to develop, we're trying to sanitize classrooms, so it's like, "Don't bring any of that in here." What you end up, people think they want to see is they want to see flat compliance. Nobody is hurting. Nobody is sad. Nobody is laughing out loud. None of the human emotions are allowed in the classroom. We don't even let kids talk to each other. That's seen as disruption.

Jill Anderson: If we have some educators listening, what can they actually do? 

Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade: Start a pilot. Start a pilot project, one classroom. You're a parent, just figure out. How can that classroom where your child is going to school every day be more equitable? My sons are in fourth grade. Oftentimes when I go in, I'm not particularly focused on them because I know where they're at. I'm looking at some of the other kids that are sitting next to them that I know based on my conversations with them, and based on my time being invested in the kids that are moving along the grades with them, I know the kids that need a breakfast bar. And so I'm coming with that to begin to develop a relationship with them around: How do I start getting you loving reading as much as my sons love reading?

People will be surprised at how micro investments can create institutional cultural transformation because if you really think about it, if you change one kid's experience on one day, you've changed the institution. Schools have become consumed wrongly with not only big data, but the wrong big data. And that then leads us to think about change at the wrong scale. For a teacher, or for a school leader, seriously, just start a pilot project, one unit, one classroom, one group of teachers that say, "Hey, we really want to do something fundamentally different." And give them the runway and the bandwidth to innovate and learn with the expectation, this is the expectation that I always have when I go in and work with schools, is that we're going to start with the coalition of the willing. So if you're not down for this right now, it's cool. Right? 

But if you are, then we're going to invest and work with you, that small group. But the expectation is that you become a teacher of teachers. So you're not going to get all this runway to be really innovative and then you're off and running and goodbye. There's going to be a phase two, and I often work in three year phases because that's about how much time it takes for you to really start seeing cultural transformation. It doesn't happen overnight, it takes a real investment of time and energy. And then at the end of that phase one, that third year, then those teachers that I work with, they go get five more teachers. And that becomes meta project two, where now each of those five teachers that did the innovative process for the first three years, they now have satellite groups. And it's something about when a parent invites a parent, or a kid invites a kid, or a teacher invites a teacher, that warrants a very different entry point. Right?

And I think that's back to our earlier commentary about: How do we build the will? I think part of the way you build the way is the way you do the ask. And if it comes from power, the relationship to power in schools has historically been a negative one, so even when good ideas get shoved down from power, the idea wasn't bad, the implementation approach was flawed. Part of what we need to rethink, or part of what I would encourage the audience to rethink is the way in which you approach innovation and just the invitation to doing it, and a commitment to learning, an arc of growth, and understanding that at the end of year one, at the end of year two, at the end of year three, at the end of year 30, it's still going to be messy. But what we have got to change in our consciousness is this desire to sanitize the classroom, and embracing that meaningful education is messy. The meaning is in the mess. And if you resent the mess, you will miss the meaning. 

Jill Anderson: Thank you so much, Jeff. Lots and lots of stuff to think about from this conversation today.

Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade: Thank you for making some time to allow me to run my mouth. 

Jill Anderson: Jeff Duncan-Andrade is a professor of Latina and Latino studies and race and resistance studies at the San Francisco State University. He's the author of Equality or Equity: Toward a Model of Community-Responsive Education . I'm Jill Anderson. This is The Harvard EdCast, produced by the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Thanks for listening. 

An education podcast that keeps the focus simple: what makes a difference for learners, educators, parents, and communities

Related Articles

Creating Trans-Inclusive Schools

Navigating Book Bans

A guide for educators as efforts intensify to censor books

For Future Generations

Essay on Education

Here we have shared the Essay on Education in detail so you can use it in your exam or assignment of 150, 250, 400, 500, or 1000 words.

You can use this Essay on Education in any assignment or project whether you are in school (class 10th or 12th), college, or preparing for answer writing in competitive exams. 

Topics covered in this article.

Essay on Education in 150 words

Essay on education in 250-300 words, essay on education in 500-1000 words.

Education is the key to personal growth, social development, and societal progress. It encompasses formal education provided through schools and institutions, as well as informal and lifelong learning. Education equips individuals with the essential knowledge, skills, and tools necessary to navigate the complexities of life and contribute meaningfully to society.

Education empowers individuals, fostering critical thinking, creativity, and innovation. It promotes social mobility, reduces poverty, and fosters social cohesion. Through education, individuals develop the ability to make informed decisions, overcome challenges, and fulfill their potential.

Furthermore, education is a catalyst for positive change. It encourages individuals to question the status quo, explore new ideas, and contribute to the betterment of society. By investing in education, we invest in the future, equipping individuals with the necessary skills to address global challenges, drive innovation, and build a more inclusive and sustainable world.

Education is a fundamental right that should be accessible to all, regardless of gender, socioeconomic background, or geographical location. It is through education that we can create a more equitable, prosperous, and harmonious society.

Education is the cornerstone of personal and societal development. It equips individuals with the knowledge, skills, and tools necessary to navigate the complexities of life and contribute meaningfully to society. In its broadest sense, education encompasses formal schooling, informal learning, and lifelong learning.

Formal education, provided through schools and institutions, lays the foundation for intellectual, social, and emotional growth. It imparts essential knowledge, promotes critical thinking, and develops skills that are essential for success in various fields.

However, education goes beyond the classroom. Informal learning occurs through everyday experiences, interactions, and self-directed exploration. It allows individuals to acquire practical skills, adaptability, and a broader understanding of the world.

Lifelong learning is a continuous process that extends beyond formal education. It involves the pursuit of knowledge and personal growth throughout one’s life, enabling individuals to adapt to changing circumstances, embrace new opportunities, and contribute to a dynamic society.

Education empowers individuals, enabling them to overcome challenges, make informed decisions, and fulfill their potential. It plays a vital role in promoting social mobility, reducing poverty, and fostering social cohesion.

Moreover, education fosters critical thinking, creativity, and innovation, which are essential for progress and development. It encourages individuals to question the status quo, explore new ideas, and contribute to positive change.

In conclusion, education is an indispensable tool for personal growth and societal progress. It encompasses formal, informal, and lifelong learning, providing individuals with the knowledge, skills, and mindset necessary to navigate the complexities of life. By investing in education, we invest in the future, empowering individuals and communities to create a better world.

Title: Education – Empowering Minds, Shaping Futures

Introduction :

Education is a powerful tool that empowers individuals, shapes futures, and drives societal progress. It encompasses the acquisition of knowledge, development of skills, and cultivation of values that prepare individuals for personal and professional success. This essay delves into the importance of education, its key elements, and its transformative impact on individuals and societies.

The Power of Education

Education is a transformative force that empowers individuals to reach their full potential. It equips them with the necessary knowledge and skills to navigate life’s challenges, make informed decisions, and contribute meaningfully to society. Education cultivates critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving abilities, nurturing well-rounded individuals capable of adapting to a rapidly changing world.

Formal Education

Formal education, provided through schools, colleges, and universities, forms the foundation of a person’s educational journey. It involves structured learning environments, standardized curricula, and certified qualifications. Formal education imparts core subjects such as mathematics, science, languages, and humanities, along with important life skills such as communication, collaboration, and critical analysis.

Informal and Lifelong Learning

Education goes beyond formal settings. Informal learning occurs through daily experiences, interactions, and observations. It includes practical skills acquired through apprenticeships, mentorships, and on-the-job training. Lifelong learning, on the other hand, is a continuous process that extends beyond formal education. It involves self-directed learning, personal development, and the pursuit of knowledge throughout one’s life.

The Role of Education in Society

Education plays a crucial role in social development and progress. It promotes social mobility, empowering individuals to transcend socioeconomic barriers and improve their quality of life. Education fosters social cohesion by nurturing understanding, empathy, and tolerance among diverse groups of individuals. It also contributes to economic growth by producing a skilled workforce, fostering innovation, and driving entrepreneurship.

Education for Personal Development

Education is not merely the acquisition of knowledge; it is also a journey of personal growth and self-discovery. It helps individuals develop their unique talents, interests, and passions. Education cultivates values such as integrity, responsibility, and empathy, shaping individuals into ethical and compassionate members of society. Furthermore, it nurtures self-confidence, self-awareness, and resilience, equipping individuals with the tools to overcome challenges and thrive in a competitive world.

Challenges and Opportunities in Education

Despite the transformative power of education, there are numerous challenges that need to be addressed. Access to quality education remains unequal, particularly for marginalized communities and disadvantaged regions. Gender disparities in education persist, limiting opportunities for girls and women. Furthermore, the rapid advancement of technology necessitates adapting educational systems to prepare individuals for the demands of the digital age.

However, there are also exciting opportunities in education. Technology has the potential to revolutionize learning, making education accessible, interactive, and personalized. Blended learning models, online platforms, and open educational resources offer new avenues for education. Emphasizing holistic education, including social and emotional development, promotes well-rounded individuals capable of addressing complex global challenges.

Conclusion :

Education is a transformative force that empowers individuals, shapes futures, and drives societal progress. It goes beyond formal schooling, encompassing informal and lifelong learning. Education fosters critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving abilities, equipping individuals with the skills to navigate an ever-changing world. It promotes social mobility, social cohesion, and economic growth. Moreover, education is a journey of personal development, nurturing values, skills, and self-awareness. While challenges such as unequal access and gender disparities persist, advancements in technology offer exciting opportunities for innovation and inclusive learning. By investing in education and ensuring equal opportunities for all, societies can unlock the full potential of individuals, leading to a more prosperous, equitable, and sustainable future.

Related Posts

Essential Elements of Valid Contract (Explained With Examples)

What is World Population? Main Causes, Effects, Top 20 Countries

Here’s How Data Can Help Unlock Education Equity

Tc’s renzhe yu, alex bowers, and youmi suk break down their ongoing, different approaches to the same goal: high quality education for all.

Now more than ever, educational equity — ensuring all students have access to meaningful educational opportunities, from college preparation and career assistance to support resources to civic participation — is crucial across America. However, the journey towards educational equity demands a multifaceted approach, with cross-collaboration and data at the helm. That’s where a core aspect of TC’s educator preparation and overall ethos comes into play, seeking to narrow the opportunity gaps millions of U.S. students face. 

While The Center for Educational Equity , established in 2005, focuses on research and policy around fair school funding and civic participation, three TC faculty members are finding unique ways to leverage data for equity. Renzhe Yu , Assistant Professor of Learning Analytics and Educational Data Mining, is leveraging data analytics to uncover the unintended consequences of the rapid adoption of generative artificial intelligence. Alex Bowers , Professor of Education Leadership, is showcasing the power of learning analytics and interoperable data sets to identify and address critical indicators of equity. Youmi Suk , Assistant Professor of Applied Statistics, is harnessing big educational data and cutting-edge machine learning methods to address questions about equity and fairness in educational practice.

Renzhe Yu, Assistant Professor of Learning Analytics and Educational Data Mining; Alex Bowers, Professor of Education Leadership; Youmi Suk, Assistant Professor of Applied Statistics (Photo: TC Archives)

• To reveal the bias and unintended consequences of generative artificial intelligence , Renzhe Yu performs large-scale data analytics.
• In order to identify issues of equity in a transparent way, Alex Bowers utilizes learning analytics and public data.
• Working to improve test fairness and curriculum planning , Youmi Suk draws connections between psychometrics, causal inference and algorithmic fairness.

(Image: iStock)

How Data Analytics Can Address the Growing Digital Divides

Stemming from Yu’s interest in learning how to “equip ourselves to better address existing issues related to education inequity,” his most pressing research focuses on understanding how the mass adoption of generative artificial intelligence has exacerbated digital divides in schools and institutions. Explored in a forthcoming working paper, the project uses large-scale text data from the education system to examine differences in everyday teaching and learning experiences as well as institutional attitudes toward generative AI.

“There are students who are more tech-savvy, there are instructors who are more experienced in using technologies, there are institutions that are more open-minded…and they have probably taken good advantage of ChatGPT and other generative AI tools in the past year,” explains Yu. But there’s also a significant number of students, parents, instructors, and institutions that don’t have that kind of access or awareness. “Although it’s just one year, the emergence of this technology may have widened these gaps,” says Yu.

To explore this growing divide, Yu and his research team focused on real-world data sources instead of conducting lab-controlled experiments in order to see how these relationships are playing out in real life. Because of his familiarity with the tech industry and the still-common impulse to innovate without considering the way that entire populations can be left behind, Yu says, “it’s really important to identify these unintended consequences in the early phase of life for these technologies.”

Yu’s other research interest in algorithmic bias — where he has long been exploring how algorithms used for decision making are treating learners differently based on race or other socio-demographic markers — is also made more urgent by the emergence of generative AI tools because if biased algorithms are “having dynamic conversations with students, [as is the case with generative AI,] the negative consequences of any bias in the process would be even more concerning.”

Ultimately, Yu hopes that his work provides perspective that is often ignored in the innovation process in order to create an education system that achieves equity with the help of advanced technology. 

How Data Can Inform Equity Efforts in School Policy and Conversation

Meanwhile, Bowers is looking at new ways school leaders can use reliable, evidence-based data practices to support equity efforts in schools nationwide. “One of my goals is to help bring communities together around the data that already exists for them—that’s already available, and help empower those communities,” he explains.

His recent work focuses on building collaboration with urban schools to identify data-driven equity practices and outcomes in education. In using a multidimensional framework, Bowers is hoping to facilitate more meaningful discussions with school communities by moving away from stigmatizing variables like standardized test scores and graduation rates.

“I think school districts are excited to have a definition of equity that they can bring into these community conversations, both with the school board, but also with teachers, parents, students.”

The project is fueled by his earlier research , which explores the value of interoperable, equitable datasets, along with a report that he co-authored with the National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP). The comprehensive report details the 16 indicators for assessing equity in education, including academic outcomes like test scores, graduation rates, behavioral data, and opportunities such as student engagement, access to quality learning, pre-K experiences, and more.These indicators give administrators and teachers a more transparent lens to examine school performance.

“It can help us move into a framework of, "How are we serving our students?" "Are we serving our communities?" It's moving away from fixating on the gaps and the outcomes and [instead] trying to problem solve as a collaborative opportunity through which we can bring in existing data.”

How Interdisciplinary Approaches to Analyzing Data Can Promote Fairness

For clearer reading.

Causal Inference: An interdisciplinary subfield that determines the cause of an observed effect by considering assumptions, design and estimation strategies.

Psychometrics: A subfield of psychology centered on theories and applications of measurement, assessment and testing.

A leading researcher exploring test accommodation effectiveness, Suk takes a multi-pronged approach to her main research goal of “developing and applying quantitative methods to address practical and important problems in the educational, social, and behavioral sciences.” One of her central projects is forging a connection between test fairness, a field of study that has been developed over 60 years, and algorithmic fairness, an emerging field with high stakes as algorithmic models are utilized in all aspects of life. 

“We can leverage the people, the methods and the concepts developed in test fairness in order to facilitate understanding of algorithmic fairness,” says Suk who is incorporating psychometrics and causal inference concepts into her work. “And it can go both ways. If there's any new discussion happening around algorithm fairness, we can leverage that discussion to make assessments and tests fairer.” As a part of this work, Suk is crafting new frameworks to investigate test fairness on the individual level instead of on the group level, based on the discussions on individual fairness within the algorithmic fairness research.

Her work is also directly informing her recent research on fair and personalized math curriculum recommendations for high school students, funded by the National Science Foundation. It’s known that students get the most benefit from personalized recommendations but “we have to be aware there may be some unconscious bias [in the recommendations],” explains Suk. To address this, Suk is applying algorithmic fairness constraints to create more equitable recommendations for high school students.

Through her varied research, Suk ultimately hopes to “create equitable and fair testing environments for all students and personalized curriculum plans that empower every student to succeed.”

— Sherri Gardner and Jaqueline Teschon

Tags: Evaluation & Learning Analytics Bias Education Leadership Evaluation & Learning Analytics

Programs: Applied Statistics Cognitive Science in Education Education Leadership Learning Analytics Measurement and Evaluation

Departments: Human Development Organization & Leadership

Published Monday, Apr 22, 2024

Teachers College Newsroom

Address: Institutional Advancement 193-197 Grace Dodge Hall

Box: 306 Phone: (212) 678-3231 Email: views@tc.columbia.edu

• Bahasa Indonesia
• Slovenščina
• Science & Tech
• Russian Kitchen

Moscow rises in rating of world's Best Student Cities

Students point out that the cost of living is not cheap in Moscow, but this is made up for by the low cost of a quality education, and by minimal daily expenses on food.

Moscow finished 39th in a ranking of the 125 best cities for students in the world, which was published on Feb. 15.

Russia’s capital rose four points compared to last year. The rating, which was launched in 2014, was conducted by the British company Quacquarelli Symonds (QS).

“The capital of the biggest country in the world is a city of superlatives: the most populous city in Europe, home to the most billionaires, and home to the tallest building in Europe,” the publishers of the rating noted. “Student life just cannot be boring in Moscow.”

Students point out that the cost of living is not cheap in Moscow, but this is made up for by the low cost of a quality education, and by minimal daily expenses on food. Moscow earned its high score thanks to employer interest in the capital's university graduates.

In addition to Moscow, three other Russian cities appeared in the rating: St. Petersburg (78th place); Tomsk (91st place); and Novosibirsk (93rd place). Until now, Moscow was the only Russian city in the top 100.

St. Petersburg surpassed Moscow considerably in terms of accessibility of geographic location. In this category, St. Petersburg finished 7th, while Moscow came in 48th place. The authors of the rating also mention St. Petersburg's beauty, the large number of museums and cultural hotspots, low tuition fees, and relatively affordable housing.

The Top 5 Best Student Cities in 2017 are Montreal, Paris, London, Seoul and Melbourne.

Read more: Boisterous partying in Russia on Student's Day>>>

If using any of Russia Beyond's content, partly or in full, always provide an active hyperlink to the original material.

to our newsletter!

Get the week's best stories straight to your inbox

This website uses cookies. Click here to find out more.

The Composition and Element’s Speciation in the Spring Waters of the Southern Part of the Balashikha Urban District (Moscow Region)

• Published: 07 October 2023
• Volume 78 , pages 423–436, ( 2023 )

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Balabanov, I.V. and Smirnov, S.A., 500 rodnikov Podmoskov’ya (500 Springs of the Moscow Region), Moscow: Izdatel’ I.V. Balabanov, 2006.

Budarina, V.A., Kosinova, I.I., Popov, V.I., and Yakovlev, Yu.V., Metodologiya i pravovoe obosnovanie struktury razmeshcheniya osobo okhranyaemykh prirodnykh territorii (Methodology and Legal Justification of the Structure of the Location of Specially Protected Natural Areas), Voronezh: Istoki, 2015.

Fisun, N.V., Ecologic potential of the environmental and hydrogeological systems in the area of Kuchinsky municipal solid waste landfill (Moscow Region), Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Razved., Geol. Razved ., 2018, no. 3, pp. 58–64.

Gaillardet, Y., Viers, Y., and Dupre, B., Trace elements in river water. Ch. 7.7, in Treatise on Geochemistry, 2nd ed. , Elsevier Ltd, 2014, vol. 7, pp. 195–235.

Google Scholar  

Geologicheskaya i gidrogeologicheskaya karty SSSR masshtaba 1 : 200 000. Seriya Moskovskaya. List N-37-III. Ob’’yasn. Zap . (The 1 : 200 000 Geological and Hydrogeological Maps of the USSR. Ser. Moscow. Sheet N-37-III. Explanatory Note), Moscow, 1975.

Geologicheskaya karta chetvertichnykh otlozhenii Moskovskoi oblasti. 1 : 500 000 (The 1 : 500 000 Geological Map of Quaternary Deposits of the Moscow Region), Sychkin, N.I., Ed., Moscow: MPR RF, 1998.

GOST (State Standard) 31859-2012. Water. Method for Determination of Chemical Oxygen Demand , Moscow: Standartinform, 2014.

Gosudarstvennaya geologicheskaya karta Rossiiskoi Federatsii masshtaba 1 : 200 000. Izd. 2-e. Seriya Moskovskaya. List N-37-II (Moskva). Ob’’yasn. zap. (The 1 : 200 000 State Geological Map of the Russian Federation, 2nd ed. Ser. Moscow. Sheet N-37-II (Moscow)), St. Petersburg: Kartfabr. Vseross. Nauchno-Issled. Geol. Inst., 2001.

Gromova, V.A., Shestakova, T.V., and Lipatnikova, O.A., Ecological-geochemical evaluation of the state of surface water streams in the impact area of the tailing dump of the Urupsky ore mining, Moscow Univ. Geol. Bull ., 2016, vol. 71, no. 6, pp. 407–415.

Article   Google Scholar  

Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality: 4th ed ., Geneva: World Health Organization, 2017.

Gustafson, J.P., Visual MINTEQ, Version 3.1 . https://vminteq.lwr.kth.se (Accessed September 21, 2021).

Limantseva, O.A., Conditions of evolution of chemical composition of spring water in the Moscow area and forecast of its change under the man-induced load, Cand. (Geol.-Mineral) Dissertation , Moscow, 2004.

Lipatnikova, O.A. and Lubkova, T.N., The forms of occurrence of trace elements in natural waters of the aquatic formations of the Moscow Canal and the Volga–Baltic System, Moscow Univ. Geol. Bull ., 2021, vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 215–222.

Lipatnikova, O.A., Lubkova, T.N., and Yablonskaya, D.A., Approaches to water quality management in water supply sources (by the example of the Ivankovsky and Vyshnevolotsky reservoirs, Russia, in Proc. 16th Int. Multidisciplinary Sci. Geoconf. SGEM 2016. Vol. 3: Water Resources. Forest, Marine and Ocean Ecosystems , 2016, pp. 35–42.

Lozovik, P.A., Morozov, A.K., Zobkov, M.B., et al., Allochthonous and autochthonous organic matter in surface waters in Karelia, Water Resour ., 2007, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 204–216.

Lubkova, T.N., Lipatnikova, O.A., Filatova, O.R., and Balykova, I.V., X-ray fluorescence analysis of sulfate-ion in aqueous solutions by dried drop technique using a portable spectrometer, Moscow Univ. Geol. Bull ., 2022, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 305–314.

Maidzhi, O.V. and Bukharova, A.R., Landscape park of the Gorenki estate, Vestn. Ros. Gos. Agrarn. Zaochn. Univ ., 2011, no. 11, pp. 43–48.

Meybeck, M., Global occurrence of major elements in rivers, in Treatise on Geochemistry. Vol. 5 , Amsterdam: Elsevier–Pergamon, 2004, pp. 207–223.

Novikov, A.V., Sumarukova, O.V., and Shiryaeva, M.A., Environmental safety management aspects of the Pekhorka Rivwer catchment, in Mater. Vseros. nauch.-prakt. konf. “Ekologiya. Risk. Bezopasnost” (Proc. All-Russ. Sci.-Pract. Conf. “Ecology. Risk. Safety”), Kurgan, 2020, pp. 121–124.

Official website of the Administration of the Balashikha City District. http://www.balashiha.ru/ (Accessed October 22, 2021). Regional News Agency of the Moscow Region (RIAMO). https://riamo.ru/ (Accessed September 4, 2021).

Piper, A., A graphic procedure in the geochemical interpretation of water-analyses, Trans., Am. Geophys. Union , 1944, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 914–928.

Pit’eva, K.E., Poyasnitel’naya zapiska k karte raionirovaniya po usloviyam formirovaniya khimicheskogo sostava gruntovykh vod Nechernozemnoi zony RSFSR (za isklyucheniem gornoi chasti Urala i Kaliningradskoi oblasti). Masshtab 1 : 500 000 (Explanatory Note to the 1 : 500 000 Zoning Map on the Formation Conditions of the Groundwater Chemical Composition in the Non-Chernozem zone of the RSFSR (Except for the Mountain Part of the Urals and the Kaliningrad Region), Moscow: Mosk. Gos. Univ., 1983.

PozdnIakova, I.A., Kozhevnikova, I.A., Kostikova, I.A., and Toms, L.S., Groundwater interaction assessment based on the large-scale mapping of geological and hydrogeological conditions in Moscow, Geoekol., Inzh. Geol., Gidrogeol., Geokriol ., 2012, no. 6, pp. 527–539.

SanPiN (Sanitary Regulations and Standards) 1.2.3684-21 “Sanitary and epidemiological requirements for the maintenance of the territories of urban and rural settlements, to water facilities, drinking water and drinking water supply, atmospheric air, soils, living quarters, operation of industrial, public premises, organization and conduct of sanitary and anti-epidemic (preventive) measures,” January 29, 2001, no. 62297. https://docs.cntd.ru/document/573536177 (Accessed January 22, 2022).

Savenko, A.V., Savenko, V.S., and Pokrovsky, O.S., Trace elements in the spring waters of Moscow, Moscow Univ. Geol. Bull ., 2020, vol. 75, pp. 177–189.

Shvartsev, S.L., Gidrogeokhimiya zony gipergeneza (Hydrogeochemistry of the Hypergenesis Zone), Moscow: Nedra, 1998.

Shvets, V.M., Lisenkov, A.B., and Popov, E.V., Rodniki Moskvy (Springs in the Moscow Area), Moscow: Nauchn. mir, 2002.

Stiff, H.A., The interpretation of chemical water analysis by means of patterns, J. Petrol. Technol ., 1951, vol. 3, no. 10, pp. 15–17.

The Geochemist’s Workbench (GWB). https:// www.gwb.com (Accessed June 3, 2021).

Vasil’eva, E.Yu., Geoecology of spring waters of Sergiev Posad district of the Moscow region, Cand. (Geol.-Mineral.) Dissertation, Moscow, 2009.

Vsevolozhsky, V.A., Poyasnitel’naya zapiska k karte podzemnogo stoka Nechernozemnoi zony RSFSR (za isklyucheniem gornoi chasti Urala i Kaliningradskoi oblasti). Masshtab 1 : 500 000 ((Explanatory Note to the Map of Geomorphological-Neotectonic Zoning of Non-chernozem Zone of RSFSR (Except for the Mountain Part of the Urals and Kaliningrad Province). Scale 1 : 500 000)), Moscow: Mosk. Gos. Univ., 1983.

Zaikina, I.V., Nazarov, A.A., Antipov, M.A., and Salmenkova, S.V., Assessment of pollutants entering the pedosphere and hydrosphere from the Lis’ya Gora ski resort, Prirodoobustroistvo , 2012, no. 4, pp. 19–22.

Zeegofer, Yu.O., Klyukvin, A.N., Pashkovskii, I.S., and Roshal’, A.A., Postoyanno deistvuyushchie modeli gidrolitosfery territorii gorodskikh aglomeratsii (na primere Moskovskoi aglomeratsii) (Permanent Hydrolithosphere Models for Territories of Urban Agglomerations: Case Study of the Moscow Agglomeration), Moscow: Nauka, 1991.

Download references

The study was supported by the “Development of integrated techniques of physical, forecast–prospecting, and environmental geochemistry” State budget theme (Contract no. 5-3-2021).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Moscow State University, 119991, Moscow, Russia

O. A. Lipatnikova, T. N. Lubkova, D. A. Yablonskaya, O. R. Filatova & L. A. Dmitrieva

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to O. A. Lipatnikova , T. N. Lubkova , D. A. Yablonskaya , O. R. Filatova or L. A. Dmitrieva .

Ethics declarations

The authors state that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Translated by A. Rylova

About this article

Lipatnikova, O.A., Lubkova, T.N., Yablonskaya, D.A. et al. The Composition and Element’s Speciation in the Spring Waters of the Southern Part of the Balashikha Urban District (Moscow Region). Moscow Univ. Geol. Bull. 78 , 423–436 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3103/S0145875223030110

Download citation

Received : 31 October 2022

Revised : 02 November 2022

Accepted : 22 May 2023

Published : 07 October 2023

Issue Date : June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3103/S0145875223030110

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• spring waters
• Balashikha urban district
• Ucha–Balashikha hydrogeologic block
• major component composition
• dissolved trace elements
• thermodynamic calculations
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research