essay on quality education

What makes a quality education?

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Claire Boonstra

.chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} Explore and monitor how .chakra .wef-15eoq1r{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;color:#F7DB5E;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-15eoq1r{font-size:1.125rem;}} Sustainable Development is affecting economies, industries and global issues

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:, sustainable development.

What constitutes a quality education? Today, quality is most often measured through the OECD’s PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) standardized tests – and countries are ranked accordingly. The higher on that list, the better your education would be. But do these results and rankings still relate to what really matters today – and tomorrow?

At first glance, the relationship between PISA and economic performance doesn’t seem too hard to pinpoint. Correlations between high PISA rankings and “hard” variables such as GDP, performance, productivity – these are easy enough to draw up. But if we agree that the success of modern-day economies is based on more than children’s ability to read, write and do maths, what other variables might we draw up and how might we assess their presence? If we also agree that societies are more than just their economic performance, what of instruments such as GDP and PISA?

Preparing children for life

The rapid changes we’re experiencing in our societies are having a substantial impact on the likelihood that our children will find a satisfying path when they are older. Our life expectancies are rising dramatically. Rather than pinpointing the single role they’ll play, children may have to prepare for a series of roles, more so than we have so far been used to.

The meaningful discussion I believe we should engage in thus goes beyond the mere necessity of finding a job. Should an education prepare us for a single job to last our entire career, or might it take into account the sequence of professional roles that is becoming more commonplace?

Does one mould fit all?

Each developing child passes through our school system to reach their full potential as an adult in society. The current version of our education system requires each child to be measured against the same standards. We must all fit these particular norms, fit that particular mould, strive to meet those specific criteria. Are we not wasting an awful amount of potential and harming both ourselves and society? Wouldn’t developing the full and infinite potential of each person be the preferable route to take, for each individual as well as humanity? What if we could use all our existing knowledge on learning and developments in technology to find a solution that matches the natural diversity in talents with the infinite array of different roles?

Artificial employees

We are entering an age where computers, robots and artificial intelligence will start to outperform humans in skills we score children against today: computation, applied writing, organization and assembly, rote memorization, decision-tree-based problem solving. Replacing humans in such jobs makes as much economic sense as the replacement of horses by cars once did. In healthcare, in retail, in the services industry, this is already happening and there is every reason to believe it will continue.

Roles likely to avoid such robotization for some time yet are those that revolve around the precise traits that make us unmistakably human: inventiveness, creativity, empathy, entrepreneurialism, intuition, lateral thinking, cultural sensitivity, to name a few. What if we gave these more emphasis in schools? Who is going to programme the robots?

Policy changes vs. fundamental review

Changes at the policy level are a constant for our schools and our teachers are right to sigh at yet another shift. Changes in recent years seem to have been mostly directed at the what and the how of education, rather than the more fundamental question: what is it for? That is the broad, deep and fundamental discussion I would very much like to see happening: what should be the purpose of our education, if a substantial portion of our children will soon have more than 100 years to spend in societies that are changing rapidly?

It’s up to each of us to find our own answers to these questions: individuals, schools and also governments, in creating the wider conditions for their citizens. There may be no correct or ideal answers, just like there are no ‘ideal’ political standpoints. But we must try to answer them, to determine a course for the compass.

Five attempts at an answer

After several years of asking these questions in various national and international forums, I’ve come to the conclusion that education has five key goals:

• To unleash the infinite potential of humanity. A substantial potential remains unused in people, simply because current curricula and testing bodies lack the means to address it. Imagine the benefits of an education system that helps students reach their full potential? Imagine the effect such students might have on our societies?
• To learn how to apply oneself as an instrument towards lifelong value. Post-war generations went to work where they could. In contrast, recent generations have learned to do what they enjoy. Bridging the two tendencies, we might teach children how they matter and impart a sense of self-appreciation in a societal context. Ask them what are their core strengths, their talents and interests, and how they will put these to use for society?
• To learn how to shape the future. Rather than preparing children for the future – which is rather passive and arguably impossible to do, as we don’t know how history will develop – we might teach children how they may have an influence on society; how they may shape, design, develop, articulate, make and programme ideas and things.
• To understand and master the conditions for peace. Conflict resolution, clear interpersonal communications, empathy and intercultural understanding may well be crucial traits of our societies if they are to stay liveable, both in the context of our increasingly culturally diverse societies as well as the everyday school and work environment.
• To learn how to be healthy and happy. Taking proper care of one’s body and discovering the drivers of one’s general well-being are essential skills to succeed at life. Schools might help students find a good balance between effort, exercise and relaxation, and to define their personal priorities in life.

This is not a debate for politicians and civil servants alone. Every single one of us is a decision-maker when it comes to education. None of us should debate how a quality education is best provided to children or how such quality is best assessed if we haven’t first asked ourselves: what is quality education in the first place?

Have you read? 5 reasons why we need to reduce global inequality Why gender equality will make or break the Global Goals

Author: Claire Boonstra is the co-founder of tech start-ups, founder of Operation Education and a Young Global Leader

Guest editor of this series is Owen Gaffney, Director, International Media and Strategy, Stockholm Resilience Centre and Future Earth

Image: Children sit inside a classroom on their first day of school at Shimizu elementary school in Fukushima, northern Japan April 6, 2011. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

Share this:

• Share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

The Agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} Weekly

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Sustainable Development .chakra .wef-17xejub{-webkit-flex:1;-ms-flex:1;flex:1;justify-self:stretch;-webkit-align-self:stretch;-ms-flex-item-align:stretch;align-self:stretch;} .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

5 ways businesses can help to alleviate poverty

Sreevas Sahasranamam and Vivek Soundararajan

May 3, 2024

5 countries leading the charge on recycling e-waste

Reducing Embodied Carbon in Cities: Nine Solutions for Greener Buildings and Communities

Desalination: What is it and how can it help tackle water scarcity?

Johnny Wood

April 15, 2024

'It's now cheaper to save the world than destroy it': author Akshat Rathi on Climate Capitalism 

Robin Pomeroy and Sophia Akram

April 10, 2024

3 social economy innovators that are driving change in Brazil

Eliane Trindade

April 4, 2024

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

Quality education an ‘essential pillar’ of a better future, says UN chief

Facebook Twitter Print Email

Education is an “essential pillar” to achieving the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, UN chief António Guterres told an audience on Tuesday at the Paris headquarters of UNESCO, the UN Educational, Scientific and Culture Organization, ahead of the agency’s General Conference .

We must ensure universal access to basic education for every child, everywhere. Tijjani Muhammad-Bande, President, UN General Assembly

Mr. Guterres, who noted that one-fifth of young people are out of work, lack education or adequate training, praised UNESCO ’s fundamental role in coordinating and monitoring global efforts, such as the agency’s initiative on the future of education.

The theme was taken up by Tijjani Muhammad-Bande, President of the UN General Assembly, in his opening remarks to a ministerial meeting on education at the Conference.

Mr. Muhammad-Bande referred to estimates showing that some 265 million children are out of school. The number is projected to fall to 220 million over the next decade, but he declared that the illiteracy figures forecast for 2030 remain a scandal: “We must remove all barriers to education. We must ensure, at a minimum, universal access to basic education for every child, everywhere.”

He also highlighted the importance of educating children effectively, and equipping them with the necessary analytical and critical thinking abilities, in “an ever-changing and more complex world”.

Recalling his former experience as an educator in his home country of Nigeria, Mr. Muhammad-Bande called for more efforts to ensure that teachers are adequately qualified, because “no educational system can rise above the quality of its teachers”.

We must treat young people not as subjects to be protected, but as powerful agents for change.I was very pleased to meet a few of these changemakers at @UNESCO this morning. pic.twitter.com/DjgZP0jNh9 António Guterres, UN Secretary-General antonioguterres

Other important measures cited by the General Assembly President include strong curricula that fully integrate Information and Communications Technology (ICT); ensuring that girls complete at least 12 years of education (which, according to the World Bank, would add some $30 trillion to the global economy); and the effective monitoring and evaluation of learning.

Mr. Muhammad-Bande called on nations to meet their commitments to education spending, and for donor countries to increase international aid directed towards education.

‘Powerful agents of change’

As well as the difficulties in accessing quality education, Mr. Guterres also outlined several other challenges faced by young people: the fact that millions of girls become mothers while they are still children; that one quarter are affected by violence or conflict; and that online bullying and harassment are adding to high levels of stress, which see some 67,000 adolescents die from suicide or self-harm every year.

World leaders, and others who wield power, he continued, must treat young people not as subjects to be protected, but as powerful agents for change, and the role of the powerful is not to solve the enormous challenges faced by young people, but rather to give them the tools to tackle their problems.

Mr Guterres underscored the importance of bringing young people to the table as key partners, and praised UNESCO’s efforts to include their voices, which include holding a major event at the General Conference, and the Youth Forum .

• quality education

Quality in Education—Concept, Origin, and Approaches

• First Online: 27 September 2017

Cite this chapter

• Charu Jain 3 &
• Narayan Prasad 4  

876 Accesses

2 Citations

Being instrumental in bringing about the economic development of a country, education and is one of the basic services offered by government and stakeholders to society. However, as mere quantitative expansion would not generate the desired results unless a particular standard of quality is maintained, it is essential that policies shift their focus from increasing enrolments to quality improvement in all spheres—beginning from making school facilities available to students, developing their learning skills which is not just limited to curriculum knowledge, and initiating efficient teaching practices. The concept of quality in the field of education is not new; therefore, it is even important to understand how the quality debate has evolved over the years and how it has come to be linked with the provision of education. This chapter describes the theoretical aspect of quality concept, its historical origin in the field of education, various related models and approaches. It is being argued that the concept of quality in education is multifaceted; it does not possess any specific definition; different scholars have interpreted the concept differently. The differences lie not only in the way this concept is defined, but is also reflected in the manner in which quality is measured. Although, worldwide, research initiatives has been undertaken to identify the quality indicators, measuring the educational outcomes, in the Indian context, little evidence is available, particularly in case of secondary education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Adams, D. (1993). Defining educational quality. Improving Educational Quality Project Publication , 1.

Google Scholar  

Delors, J. (1996). Learning, the treasure within . Report to UNESCO of the international commission on education for the twenty-first century: Highlights, UNESCO Publications.

Deming, D. W. (1986). Out of crisis . London: Cambridge University Press.

European Commission. (2000). Report on the quality of education 16 quality indicators .

Goddard, D., & Leask, M. (1992). The search for quality: Management in education . London: Paul Chapman.

Grisay, A., & Mahlck, L. (1991). The quality of education in developing countries . IIEP, Paris: A Preview of Some Research Studies and Policy Documents.

Hanushek, E. A. (2002). The importance of school quality . (pp. 141–173). Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press. http://hanushek.stanford.edu/publications/importance-school-quality .

Hoy, C., Bayne-Jardine, C., & Wood, M. (2000). Improving quality in education . London: Falmer Press.

Kumar, K., & Sarangapani, P. M. (2005). History of the quality debate . Paper commissioned for the EFA global monitoring report 2005, the quality imperative, UNESCO.

Linston, C. (1999). Managing quality and standard . Buckhingam: Open University Press.

NUEPA. (2014). Education for all: Towards quality with equity India (1st ed.) Ministry of Human Resource Development, GOI, August 2014.

Reddy, S. (2007). School quality: Perspectives from the developed and developing countries , AzimPremji Foundation. http://www.azimpremjifoundation.org/pdf/ConsolidatedSchoolQualityreport.pdf .

Sallis, E. (1996). Total quality management in education . London: Kogan Page.

Stephens, D. (2003). Quality of basic education. Background paper for education for all global monitoring report 2003–04, Gender and education for all: The leap to equality.

UNESCO. (1990). World declaration on education for all : Framework for action to meet basic learning needs , Jomtein, Thailand from March 5–9, 1990. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001275/127583e.pdf .

UNESCO. (2005). Understanding education quality. EFA global monitoring report 2005.

UNESCO. (2005). The importance of good quality: What research tells us. EFA global monitoring report.

UNESCO. (2009). World conference on higher education: The new dynamics of higher education and research for societal change and development held in Paris, 5–8 July 2009. Draft Communique (1st Draft 26 June 2009), ED.2009/CONF.402/2.

UNICEF. (June 2000). Defining quality in education . A paper presented by UNICEF at the meeting of the international working group on education florence, Italy, Working Paper Series, Education Section, Programme Division, United Nations Children’s Fund UNICEF, USA.

Wadsworth, H. M., Stephens, K. S., & Godfrey, A. B. (2002). Modern methods for quality control and improvement . New York: Wiley.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

National Council of Applied Economic Research, New Delhi, Delhi, India

School of Social Sciences, Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), New Delhi, Delhi, India

Narayan Prasad

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charu Jain .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Jain, C., Prasad, N. (2018). Quality in Education—Concept, Origin, and Approaches. In: Quality of Secondary Education in India. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4929-3_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4929-3_2

Published : 27 September 2017

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-10-4928-6

Online ISBN : 978-981-10-4929-3

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

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

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

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.

Quality education

Rebuilding education systems after covid-19.

[goal: 4] aims to provide high-quality education and lifelong learning opportunities for all. Globally, 1.6 billion children were affected by school closures during COVID. The average student saw schools fully or partially closed for 199 days between March 2020 and September 2021. As a result, the average student globally is roughly 1 year behind their expected learning levels, with larger losses in the poorest countries.

↓ Read the full story

An Education Crisis

Disparities in access to learning.

Source: World Bank World Development Indicators ([link: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD NY.GNP.PCAP.CD], [link: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER.ZS IT.NET.USER.ZS]), [link: https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/int/search/dataset/0038947/Learning-Poverty-Global-Database--Historical-data-and-sub-components Learning Poverty Database], [link: https://covid19.uis.unesco.org/global-monitoring-school-closures-covid19/ UNESCO Global monitoring of school closures caused by COVID-19]

Rising Learning Poverty

Distance learning platforms, % of countries reporting the use of distance learning platform.

Source: World Bank, UNESCO UIS, OECD; [link: https://www.google.com/url?q=https://tcg.uis.unesco.org/survey-education-covid-school-closures/&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1686066926313685&usg=AOvVaw3OV9PjhAUSnC0iqYpYhI5v Survey on National Education Responses to COVID-19 School Closures]

Learning Poverty projected to rise due to COVID-19

Covid-19 learning poverty projections.

Source: World Bank, UNESCO, UNICEF, USAID, FCDO, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. [link: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/publication/state-of-global-learning-poverty "The State of Global Learning Poverty 2022 update."]

Learning losses

of lost learning due to COVID-19

The pandemic caused a dramatic drop in learning activities

Share of children engaged in learning activities.

Source: Dang et al. 2021. [link: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/656051621919132722/Impact-of-COVID-19-on-Learning-Evidence-from-Six-Sub-Saharan-African-Countries Impact of COVID-19 on Learning : Evidence from Six Sub-Saharan African Countries (English).] LSMS COVID-19 Cross Country Brief Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group.

Mathematical and reading ability by socio-economic status in Mexico

Share of 10-15 year olds able to solve 4th grade division or comprehend short text.

Source: Hevia, Vergara-Lope, Velásquez-Durán, and Calderón. 2022. [link: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102515 "Estimation of the fundamental learning loss and learning poverty related to COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico."] International Journal of Educational Development 88 (2022): 102515.

Dropout rates increased during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Dropout rates pre-covid-19 and during covid-19.

Source: Moscoviz, Laura, and David Evans.2022. [link: https://www.cgdev.org/publication/learning-loss-and-student-dropouts-during-covid-19-pandemic-review-evidence-two-years “Learning Loss and Student Dropouts during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Review of the Evidence Two Years after Schools Shut Down.”] CGD Working Paper 609. Washington, DC: Center for Global Development.

Test scores in São Paulo dropped below pre-pandemic projections

5th grade national basic education assessment system (saeb) scores.

Source: Azevedo,Joao Pedro Wagner De; Rogers,F. Halsey; Ahlgren,Sanna Ellinore; Cloutier,Marie-Helene; Chakroun,Borhene; Chang,Gwang-Chol; Mizunoya,Suguru; Reuge,Nicolas Jean; Brossard,Matt; Bergmann,Jessica Lynn (2022). [link: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000380128 The State of the Global Education Crisis: A Path to Recovery]. Authors’ calculations using data from SEDUC-SP, 2021. SAEB scores range from 0 to 500.

The Recovery

Learn more about sdg 4.

In the charts below you can find more facts about SDG {activeGoal} targets, which are not covered in this story. The data for these graphics is derived from official UN data sources.

SDG target 4.4

Many youth and adults in low and middle income countries lack basic ICT skills such as copying or moving a file or folder.

Proportion of youth (aged 15-24 years) and adults (aged 15 years and above) with basic information and communications technology (ict) skills, most recent value in 2017-20 (%).

* Each dot represents a country.

Source: United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD). Retrieved from [link: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/dataportal/database UN SDG Portal (4.4)] DOWNLOAD

SDG target 4.6

Adult literacy rates between men and women have converged over time, but gaps still remain

Literacy rate (% of people ages 15 and above) by region, 1980-2020.

Source: UNESCO UIS. Retrieved from World Development Indicators([link: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.ADT.LITR.ZS SE.ADT.LITR.ZS], [link: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.ADT.LITR.MA.ZS SE.ADT.LITR.MA.ZS], [link: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.ADT.LITR.FE.ZS SE.ADT.LITR.FE.ZS]). DOWNLOAD

SDG target 4.5

Despite global progress, gender gaps in primary completion remain in Sub-Saharan Africa and Middle East & North Africa.

Source: UNESCO UIS, Retrieved from World Development Indicators, ([link: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.PRM.CMPT.ZS SE.PRM.CMPT.ZS], [link: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.PRM.CMPT.MA.ZS SE.PRM.CMPT.MA.ZS], [link: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.PRM.CMPT.FE.ZS SE.PRM.CMPT.FE.ZS]). DOWNLOAD

• Chronicle Conversations
• Article archives
• Issue archives

Recognizing and Overcoming Inequity in Education

About the author, sylvia schmelkes.

Sylvia Schmelkes is Provost of the Universidad Iberoamericana in Mexico City.

22 January 2020 Introduction

I nequity is perhaps the most serious problem in education worldwide. It has multiple causes, and its consequences include differences in access to schooling, retention and, more importantly, learning. Globally, these differences correlate with the level of development of various countries and regions. In individual States, access to school is tied to, among other things, students' overall well-being, their social origins and cultural backgrounds, the language their families speak, whether or not they work outside of the home and, in some countries, their sex. Although the world has made progress in both absolute and relative numbers of enrolled students, the differences between the richest and the poorest, as well as those living in rural and urban areas, have not diminished. 1

These correlations do not occur naturally. They are the result of the lack of policies that consider equity in education as a principal vehicle for achieving more just societies. The pandemic has exacerbated these differences mainly due to the fact that technology, which is the means of access to distance schooling, presents one more layer of inequality, among many others.

The dimension of educational inequity

Around the world, 258 million, or 17 per cent of the world’s children, adolescents and youth, are out of school. The proportion is much larger in developing countries: 31 per cent in sub-Saharan Africa and 21 per cent in Central Asia, vs. 3 per cent in Europe and North America. 2  Learning, which is the purpose of schooling, fares even worse. For example, it would take 15-year-old Brazilian students 75 years, at their current rate of improvement, to reach wealthier countries’ average scores in math, and more than 260 years in reading. 3 Within countries, learning results, as measured through standardized tests, are almost always much lower for those living in poverty. In Mexico, for example, 80 per cent of indigenous children at the end of primary school don’t achieve basic levels in reading and math, scoring far below the average for primary school students. 4

The causes of educational inequity

There are many explanations for educational inequity. In my view, the most important ones are the following:

• Equity and equality are not the same thing. Equality means providing the same resources to everyone. Equity signifies giving more to those most in need. Countries with greater inequity in education results are also those in which governments distribute resources according to the political pressure they experience in providing education. Such pressures come from families in which the parents attended school, that reside in urban areas, belong to cultural majorities and who have a clear appreciation of the benefits of education. Much less pressure comes from rural areas and indigenous populations, or from impoverished urban areas. In these countries, fewer resources, including infrastructure, equipment, teachers, supervision and funding, are allocated to the disadvantaged, the poor and cultural minorities.
• Teachers are key agents for learning. Their training is crucial.  When insufficient priority is given to either initial or in-service teacher training, or to both, one can expect learning deficits. Teachers in poorer areas tend to have less training and to receive less in-service support.
• Most countries are very diverse. When a curriculum is overloaded and is the same for everyone, some students, generally those from rural areas, cultural minorities or living in poverty find little meaning in what is taught. When the language of instruction is different from their native tongue, students learn much less and drop out of school earlier.
• Disadvantaged students frequently encounter unfriendly or overtly offensive attitudes from both teachers and classmates. Such attitudes are derived from prejudices, stereotypes, outright racism and sexism. Students in hostile environments are affected in their disposition to learn, and many drop out early.

It doesn’t have to be like this

When left to inertial decision-making, education systems seem to be doomed to reproduce social and economic inequity. The commitment of both governments and societies to equity in education is both necessary and possible. There are several examples of more equitable educational systems in the world, and there are many subnational examples of successful policies fostering equity in education.

Why is equity in education important?

Education is a basic human right. More than that, it is an enabling right in the sense that, when respected, allows for the fulfillment of other human rights. Education has proven to affect general well-being, productivity, social capital, responsible citizenship and sustainable behaviour. Its equitable distribution allows for the creation of permeable societies and equity. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development includes Sustainable Development Goal 4, which aims to ensure “inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”. One hundred eighty-four countries are committed to achieving this goal over the next decade. 5  The process of walking this road together has begun and requires impetus to continue, especially now that we must face the devastating consequences of a long-lasting pandemic. Further progress is crucial for humanity.

Notes  1 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization , Inclusive Education. All Means All , Global Education Monitoring Report 2020 (Paris, 2020), p.8. Available at https://en.unesco.org/gem-report/report/2020/inclusion . 2 Ibid., p. 4, 7. 3 World Bank Group, World Development Report 2018: Learning to Realize Education's Promise (Washington, DC, 2018), p. 3. Available at https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr2018 .  4 Instituto Nacional para la Evaluación de la Educación, "La educación obligatoria en México", Informe 2018 (Ciudad de México, 2018), p. 72. Available online at https://www.inee.edu.mx/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/P1I243.pdf . 5 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization , “Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action for the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4” (2015), p. 23. Available at  https://iite.unesco.org/publications/education-2030-incheon-declaration-framework-action-towards-inclusive-equitable-quality-education-lifelong-learning/   The UN Chronicle  is not an official record. It is privileged to host senior United Nations officials as well as distinguished contributors from outside the United Nations system whose views are not necessarily those of the United Nations. Similarly, the boundaries and names shown, and the designations used, in maps or articles do not necessarily imply endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.   

Thirty Years On, Leaders Need to Recommit to the International Conference on Population and Development Agenda

With the gains from the Cairo conference now in peril, the population and development framework is more relevant than ever. At the end of April 2024, countries will convene to review the progress made on the ICPD agenda during the annual session of the Commission on Population and Development.

The LDC Future Forum: Accelerating the Attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals in the Least Developed Countries

The desired outcome of the LDC Future Forums is the dissemination of practical and evidence-based case studies, solutions and policy recommendations for achieving sustainable development.

From Local Moments to Global Movement: Reparation Mechanisms and a Development Framework

For two centuries, emancipated Black people have been calling for reparations for the crimes committed against them. 

Documents and publications

• Yearbook of the United Nations 
• Basic Facts About the United Nations
• Journal of the United Nations
• Meetings Coverage and Press Releases
• United Nations Official Document System (ODS)
• Africa Renewal

Libraries and Archives

• Dag Hammarskjöld Library
• UN Audiovisual Library
• UN Archives and Records Management 
• Audiovisual Library of International Law
• UN iLibrary 

News and media

• UN News Centre 
• UN Chronicle on Twitter
• UN Chronicle on Facebook

The UN at Work

• 17 Goals to Transform Our World
• Official observances
• United Nations Academic Impact (UNAI)
• Protecting Human Rights
• Maintaining International Peace and Security
• The Office of the Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth
• United Nations Careers

• High contrast
• Our history
• Children in India
• Our partners
• Where we work
• Frequently asked questions
• Press centre

Search UNICEF

• Quality education

Grade-appropriate education for all boys and girls.

• Available in:

Poor quality education is leading to poor learning outcomes in India, ultimately pushing children out of the education system and leaving them vulnerable to child labour, abuse and violence. Many classrooms continue to be characterized by teacher-centred rote learning, corporal punishment and discrimination.

Learning assessments show that many of those children who are in school are not learning the basics of literacy and numeracy or the additional knowledge and skills necessary for their all-round development as specified under the Right to Education Act.

Much remains to be done to ensure a child-friendly learning environment where all children benefit from gender-sensitive and inclusive classrooms, as well as the availability of improved water, sanitation and hygiene, and mid-day meal practices.   

Every girl and boy in India has the fundamental right to quality education, an education one that helps them to acquire basic literacy and numeracy, enjoy learning without fear and feel valued and included irrespective of where they come from.       

For the first time in 10 years, reading and arithmetic scores have improved in public funded schools at early grades (ASER 2016). In seven states (Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Punjab, Haryana, Telangana and Uttarakhand) reading level increased by 7 per cent at grade 3 level since 2014. This indicates that increase in learning is possible but takes time. Nevertheless, ASER 2018 showed that in grade 5 after more than four years of schooling, only half of all children could read a grade 2 level text fluently. The National Achievement Survey 2017 which was conducted for grades 3, 5 and 8 gave a similar picture with only 45.2 per cent of students achieving the targeted performance levels across all subjects and classes at the national level. States such as Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Bihar, Odisha and Andhra Pradesh with large populations of children from scheduled castes (SC), scheduled tribes (ST) and minority communities have the lowest scores. In the NAS 2017 girls scored slightly higher or as the same level as boys.

While governments both national and state have invested in large scale learning assessments, the challenge is in the use of assessment data for improving the delivery of education rather than letting it remain a simple data collection exercise.

Successful performance in school is supported by a wide range of abilities, attitudes and socio-emotional competencies, beyond traditional literacy and numeracy skills - life skills significantly contribute to learning and are an aspect of quality education. While there is an understanding around the importance of life skills , there is a possible lack of alignment between traditional curricula and a life-skills learning agenda  and a lack of understanding of how these can be developed across the education continuum. The NEP brings this focus stressing the importance of leaning by doing.

Since March 2020, schools in India have been closed and learning has shifted to remote home-based learning for those who can access it. School closures will impact learning across the education system. Gains in enrolment, school completion, and learning must not get eroded due to the combination of schools being closed and socio-economic hardships related to Covid-19. According to the World Bank, five months of school closures due to COVID-19 will result in an immediate loss of 0.6 years of schooling adjusted for quality, bringing the effective learning that a student can achieve down from 7.9 years to 7.3 years. During this period of school closure, efforts have been made by governments to ensure continuity of learning for children while they have been home. Digital tools including internet based high tech tools like apps and online learning classes, social media platforms, television and radio were used extensively.    India is now looking at delivering education programmes differently and speedily to employ solutions, that accelerate impact and achieve scale across interventions targeted at children and adolescents.  

COVID-19 presents urgency as well as an incredible opportunity to act and transform the education system through technology using it as an important tool of capacity building, inclusiveness and quality learning, without replacing the essential role of teachers/facilitators. While technology is not a silver bullet to solve the problem of inequities in access and learning, it has huge potential for changing how teaching and learning is delivered in India, if employed in a systemic and inclusive way, empowering teachers, frontline workers, children and adolescents and increasing access to and quality of learning.

Currently around one-third of the 2.6 million secondary schools in India have ICT labs and a functional computer.  Universal access to technology in homes is yet a dream in tribal belts, interior locations, rural areas, and amongst children with disabilities. Children with poor or no access to technology face most challenges in continuing to learn. There is disproportional access to the internet across state, further extending into the rural-urban schism, where 13 per cent people of over five years of age in rural areas can use the internet against 37 per cent in urban areas. Additionally, the digital dichotomy extends to the access to hardware and devices where the poorest students and marginalised communities, including girls, do not have access to smartphones, and even if they do, internet connectivity remains poor.

The main area of UNICEF engagement and support is elementary education especially early grades and the transition to secondary education. As schools remain closed and children learn remotely, UNICEF will engage with state government for expanding access to remote learning options. UNICEF will support the expanded use of technology and the use of online systems to improve governance in education, enhance capacity of teachers, teacher support systems, other education functionaries and participation of children for enhanced learning and skills development. But at the same time recognizing that quality learning requires quality teachers and teaching.

Implementation of the National Education Policy 2020 being a priority UNICEF will provide technical support at national and state level in the key areas related to curriculum revision, learning assessment and reporting, foundational learning, life skills and career guidance.

Explore more

UNICEF India appoints Kareena Kapoor Khan as National Ambassador #ForEveryChild

Meet the new UNICEF India Youth advocates

Gaurnashi, Nahid, Vinisha, Kartik sign up as new advocates for rights of children

Unleash Your Potential

I hope my story inspires young girls to think differently and who are determined to make a positive impact on our planet.

The Fun(Doo) Way to Upskill Yourself for the Future

An interactive chat-bot is changing lives of youth across India – in a manner that’s educative, easy and fun