Uses of examinations in developing countries: Selection, research, and education sector management

In September 1984, The Chinese government asked if the Economic Development Institute of the World Bank would be interested in assisting the officials in the Ministry of Education to think through some of the policy options in the field of examinations and standardized testing. In response, in April 1985 a meeting was held in Beijing. Attending the meeting were all officials in charge of examinations at the provincial and national levels, technicians and psychometricians in charge of designing examination items, and senior university officials and planners in the Ministry of Education. Attending from outside the country were the chief executive officers of examination agencies in three OECD countries: from the United States, Robert Solomon (ETS); from Japan, Tadashi Hidano (National Center for University Examinations); and from the United Kingdom, John Reddaway (Cambridge University Examination Syndicate); directors of the National Assessment of Educational Progress and the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement; and experts on the examination systems in Sweden, Australia and Kenya.This article summarizes the comments given to the Chinese Government following that meeting. The amount of attention devoted to problems of logistics and economies of scale is perhaps more pertinent to large, heterogeneous nations like China, but many of the comments could be applied to developing countries generally. These comments cover three areas (1) specific testing issues such as aptitude vs achievement tests, multiple choice vs other formats, etc.; (2) management issues within the system of selection such as whether government agencies or universities should make the selection decision, and whether a testing agency should be autonomous from government control; and lastly, (3) the uses of testing to perform necessary research and education sector management functions.     

Private Tutoring and Social Cohesion

Mastering the public school curriculum is so important to a child's occupational future that in many regions of the world “shadow” education outside of the public system has now become the norm. In one way, this is excellent news because private investment in human capital is a strong contributor to economic and social development. However, private demand is driving a separate and powerful private industry. According to the constitutional standards in many countries, education is supposed to be “free.” This suggests that, in some instances, shadow education might be unconstitutional. The United Nations Declaration on Human Rights also says that education should be free. This suggests that in some circumstances, shadow education may be contrary to the principles of human rights. The question addressed in this article is whether shadow education is wrong. This article summarizes the arguments in favor and against shadow education and ends with a series of recommendations to better manage what has become a worldwide dilemma.     

Education and corruption

This paper will draw on standard international definitions of ‘corruption’ and apply them to the education sector. It will define corruption in education, explain why it is important, and describe various types of corruption and their causes. Emphasis will be placed on the role of higher education institutions in educational corruption, but the paper will not limit itself to higher education. In the end the paper will suggest four categories of reforms designed to minimize the risk of educational corruption. These include reforms to: (i) educational structures, (ii) the processes of management and adjudication, (iii) the mechanisms of prevention and when wrongdoing occurs, (iv) the system of sanctions.