Why Aren’t Policymakers More Concerned about Low Learning Levels? Poll Results from 12 Countries

The World Bank estimates that 7 in 10 children in low- and middle-income countries can’t read by age 10. How did this come to be? Drawing on a poll of education policymakers in 12 developing countries, in this blog we discuss three key reasons:

1. Policymakers don’t realize how bad things are
2. They’re skeptical their states have capacity to implement solutions
3. Some policymakers just don’t want to focus on those lagging behind

1. Policymakers overestimate how many children can read 

Our 2021 International Survey of Education Policymakers revealed a significant gap in understanding among policymakers, who tend to underestimate this crisis. Across 35 countries, policymakers believed that 47 percent of children could read at grade level, while the World Bank’s data indicates only 30 percent. We found a similar trend in our second round of the survey (Figure 1). In the 2022 round, across 12 countries, policymakers think 58 percent of children are at the expected reading level.

Figure 1. There is a stark difference between policymakers’ perception of the learning crisis and reality

Is this lack of awareness of the scale of the problem the reason that countries don’t take more action to address the learning crisis?

2. They’re skeptical their states have capacity to implement solutions

Even those policymakers who do recognise the scale of the learning crisis might not think that there is much the government can do about it. We asked policymakers how likely they thought new policies would actually be implemented. On average, policymakers think that only half of schools in their country would actually implement a newly announced curriculum (Figure 2). 

Figure 2. Policymakers view school meals as easier to scale than a new curriculum

What percent of schools would be able to implement a new policy?

Policymakers are more optimistic about schools implementing new policies on school feeding and corporal punishment. We’ve argued before that it may be helpful to think of two types of policies: those that are hard to deliver but not necessarily expensive (such as curriculum changes and teaching practice), and those that are expensive but relatively easy to deliver (such as school meals). Do policymakers buy into this framework? For the most part we find that they do (Figure 3). Most think the main barrier to more learning is implementation capacity (52 percent) rather than money (26 percent). In contrast, most view the main barrier to school meals as money (68 percent).

Figure 3. Policymakers feel the main barrier to improving learning is implementation capacity, not money

View on the most important barriers to different policy outcomes

So there are perceived constraints from government implementation capacity. In addition, there is a common view that parents and families are responsible for poor learning. Overall we find an even split between those who think the school or the family is the most important barrier to learning (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Family and schools are evenly cited as reasons for poor learning

If you think poverty is the main barrier to learning, then you might think there is little point to more spending on schools. We see some sign of this in the data. Of those who think poverty is the main barrier to learning, 41 percent think government spending doesn’t improve outcomes. This compared to 30 percent of those who think other problems are more important (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Policymakers are more likely to think government spending doesn’t matter if they also think poverty is the main barrier to learning

Percent who agree that spending doesn’t matter, by views on the main cause of low learning

Image

3. Some school systems prefer to focus on students at the top of the class rather than those at the bottom

Finally, a key challenge to improving learning in many countries is overambitious curricula. Maintaining high standards can be counterproductive if the material is too difficult for most students. We put this choice directly to policymakers: Should the curriculum keep up with international standards, or adjust to the level of students? Here we see a wide divergence across countries. In Pakistan, the Philippines, Ghana, Bangladesh, and Vietnam, a clear majority prefer high international standards, even if this means it is too hard for most students. In Uganda, Indonesia, Laos, and Nigeria, policymakers prefer a curriculum that is better suited to the level of students and ensuring foundational literacy and numeracy (Figure 6). 

Figure 6. Many policymakers prioritise international standards over a curriculum students can follow 

Should the curriculum keep up with international standards or adjust to the level of students?

The International Survey of Education Policymakers provides new data on some old theories around why learning remains in crisis. In order to really tackle the learning crisis, policymakers need to recognise the scale of the problem, work with existing capacity constraints, and make some difficult political calls on curriculum.

Read the full report here.