I wrote a few months ago about the success of voucher education in Chile, and thousands of students responded by staging a strike at the Presidential palace of La Moneda. I asked Chilean blogger Tomas Bradanovic to explain the strike. – Mark
In 1981, Chile changed the educational system, big time. This structural reform was aimed at decentralization, more competition, ending entry barriers and cost efficiency. Teachers were no longer civil servants of the Ministry of Education. Municipal education bureaus were created for primary and secondary schools, which had to compete with private schools receiving the same government grants for each student served. It also opened the possibility of creating new private universities with few requirements and state universities had to compete with them under conditions of self-financing.
The system gave interesting results, but was far from perfect, because some of the designed institutions barely met the efficiency requirements that they were expected to achieve. The biggest failure was municipal education because municipalities have been chronically inefficient in managing primary and high schools. Every year they lost enrollment, compared with private subsidized schools that are also free. When a school looks dirty, dilapidated with broken glass, and on strike, it will most likely be administered by a municipality.
Nevertheless, the reform also brought great advantages over the old system centralized in the Ministry of Education. In 1981 there were 8 universities in Chile and only 2 out of 10 secondary school graduates could enter university. There are now 179 higher education institutions: 59 universities, 43 professional institutes and 77 technical training centers, and 5 out of 10 graduates now entering middle school to a university. The old dream of “college for all”, the revolutionary slogan in 1967, was fulfilled in the most unexpected way: the private way.
After the military rule, during the 18 years of center-left governments, Chile did not attempt to change the reforms introduced in 1981. On the contrary, the system of subsidies was strengthened, and although they closed the door to the creation of new private colleges, they maintained the principle of self-funded state universities that compete on equal terms with private ones.
As I recall, since the return to democracy in 1990, each year there have been two major strikes in Chile: the public employees and students are as predictable as rain in winter. Strikes are sometimes stronger and sometimes weaker, but it is rare to spend a year without two strikes. Behind the strikes of students is always the claim to re-nationalize education, which is in the corporate interest of the teachers who want to go back to being public servants. It also eliminates competition from private education that is killing them. Students are only the instruments, as they are always ready to go on strike for any reason as long as they miss classes. It is a well established Chilean tradition.
Full education coverage has succeeded with primary 99.7% enrollment and 87.7% secondary education enrollment. However, It has had the paradoxical effect that completing secondary education now is not valuable for finding a job. Several studies have shown that there is little advantage to having a high school diploma. In the future, as university education comes to the masses, it is likely that professional qualifications will also start to lose value.
The problem comes when politicians began to assert the theory that if education was a tool to improve income, making it general could achieve greater social equality. This concept of egalitarian education led to higher levels of demand, and now to have a professional degree does not distinguish someone for their expertise. Education as a tool for egalitarianism is a contradiction since it does not take into account that people educate to differentiate themselves from others, not to be equal to them.
In Chile today, almost all our young people have completed secondary education and this does not qualify them at all to earn a living. Almost half are admitted to college, and as the demands are relatively low, many leave with diplomas, but without special skills needed to make a living. They also have to pay or borrow for a quite expensive education because of waste in state universities or the race for the prestigious private schools. Having finally obtained a diploma, this doesn’t make any difference because everyone gets one, even stupid people. If we add all these conditions, plus the corporate interests of the teachers, who dream of going back to being public servants not having to compete with more efficient private teachers, explains why each year, with the same regularity as the rainfall, Chile has a student and teachers strike.
My friend Tomas Bradanovic and I do disagree on many things, and he often wins our debates because he is the most articulated of both of us. But here he gives me an easy case to win. He has a contradiction in his text, on one side he praises the private education system as the one which has brought tertiary education of quality and quantity needed, but at the same time, and I quote his text, he says (…)”They also have to pay or borrow for a quite expensive education because of waste in state universities or the race for the prestigious private schools. Having finally obtained a diploma, this doesn’t make any difference because everyone gets one, even stupid people” (…). Well, what should I say. I rest my case.
Hi Alfredo,
Well my friend, I am not preaching this time, I am just trying to describe and explain a situation full of contradictions, but -if I had to preach for something- I will do it for more competition, less entry barriers, more power to people to choose free from government filters. If you ask me about the primal nature of the problem I would ask you with 3 words: lack of competition.
Ah, you bring me to preach at last
(sorry for my poor english!)
Ah, on the contradiction: the success of tertiary education (with increase of private colleges) I mentionesd was in coverage, I don´t remember have mentioned nothing about “quality”, who is a very foggy term when is reffered to education. The quality issue can only be assured with more institutions competing, monopoly is a guarantee of bad quality, at least in Chile (and anywhere I guess)
Very interesting article! I get the debate, but for an outsider to this country, it´s just helpful to understand more about what´s going on! Perhaps this is my naivety about the situation, but it actually seems quite similar to the US educational situation, no? (Except that no one protests in the US, except maybe in Northern California!) The “higher education rush” phenomenon has been happening across Europe and in the US, with more students becoming more classroom educated but at the same time making college degrees less meaningful than truly differentiating oneself through work or life experience. Meanwhile, the technical and specialized professional institutions seem to set people up for a more reliable career. Wouldn’t it be ironic if after decades of striving toward 100% graduation rates, developed countries started to see a reversal as students found the classroom education less relevant than just going online?
It’s funny that you mention that it sounds like the USA, except for the protests, as that was my reaction, too. I’ve learned more on the net in the last 18 years than I learned during the previous 30 years. I envy young people today who can learn everything online that they need to know, and can use open source software to demonstrate their skills to potential customers and employers. I don’t understand why they bother attending school!
Whenever a government subsidizes something, you get too much of it. I hope that Peter Thiel’s 20 Under 20 Fellowship provides some evidence that smart young people can prosper regardless of whether they earn a credential, and that they don’t need to exacerbate the higher education bubble.
In Chile the system is much more regulated to “standards” than in America, and credentialism is much stronger. The US has a unregulated tradition with lot of small or alternative colleges, so “normal people” can make a living good enough just having skills and experience, and maybe a tecnician training (at least in a normal economic situation). In Chile to be hired for a jof fit to technicians you need an engineer degree.
In 1990, when the door was closed to create new colleges the system was locked into a protected system owned by the main political groups, even the communist party -who lead claim to nationalize higher education- is owner of Universidad ARCIS! that is why the technical education do not receive money from government and technical diplomas has no prestige.
I had teach both at universities and technical schools: in the universities students receive all the help from government: credit, fellowship, and lot of fiscal money flows there. Technical students has to pay by their-self their studies because the system is almost 100% private.
The lack of competition in higher education explains many of the unsatisfaction of students. Goverment acts in sake of “academic escellence” with entry barriers and acrediting based in standarization, so the offer remains stagnated in a changing world who need to adapt, diferentiate and change.
The main problem is for “normal students”, those who are neither so smart nor completly stupid, the first receive fellowships easily, the last are subsidied by many asistencialist plans, but those who are in the middle are trapped with no help nor future.
intriguing insight on what is going on around here! love the blog!
I’m glad you like it, and thanks for stopping by!
Chilean education is great! The free education system doesn’t work unless you live in Cuba and have food rations as meals. Free education doesn’t improve the education on the contrary and unless it is under a comunist regimen or a dictator it has shown that free schools are not respected by their own students and even the teachers feel it is unfair. You are just lowering the teaching profession. Techinical schools dont work like they do in USA because of the sociaty. Has nothing to do with the education system. The gafitter is underpay is not to blame in collages or schools. You just dont like the president and think
is cool being a comunist. Go and live in cuba
Tomas. If you realy want to talk about education how is possible that you let ypur country appear under the whole world like not civilized and lower than a 3 world country. Strikes is the worst way of showing you even know something about education. A teenager died and the blame is yours and the people that work to create this strike. You teach?! I think maybe that is the wrong part of all the equation. That in chile people like you can be call a teacher. You want people to listen and agree to your points of view. So make meetings with the president and a big group of education leaders. Not throwing gas bombs and rocks to underpay poor police officer. That had no money to even have half of the education you waste
and no oportunitys. You know how many police officers where injure? Mr education. Why you don’t understand that by belowering the security and civil protection of a country you are hurting everybody. Why you don’t worry about the police oficer life if you are so worry about students. The agression that this semi terrorist do against police officers and law enforsmant is awful. Students??? No terrorists! That is what they do everytime they attack police officers with lacrimogen bombs. I was a teacher in chile and there is a very strong frustrated comunist movement full of resentment and envy from some parts of the society. Specialy the ones that have a lower economical situation. They feel unfair and they think that fair is too attack policeman and be unhappy and complaining about everything. Chile is a great country. It was an incredible safe place. Today there is alot of house assaults. All this low class individuals trying to steal. If you cars about education. Care about helping your president make Santiago a safer place. Don’t humiliate the policeman world wide. On the contrary teach people how to behave on democrasy but respect for the other wellbeing. I was embarresed if seing a bunch of Humans behaving like real Indians.
Hi Derek,
Well, if you are talking seriously may be good if you back your words with numbers. I don´t know what you exactly mean with “your country appear under the whole world like not civilized and lower than a 3 world country”, specially I can not imagine in “what” you consider that Chile is “under” 3rd world countries.
Some facts:
Fact 1: Chile since 2006 leader Latin America in standard PISA tests, I mean Latin America, not to mention Africa or Middle East, please check http://www.oei.es/noticias/spip.php?article1488
Fact 2: I live in the border with Perú and not far to Bolivia, so I know well both educational systems and if Chile has problems, man, I guarantee that problems in those countries are some orders of magnitude worse.
Fact 3: the coverage of basic education in Chile is practically universal (basic 99,7% and middle 87,7%, university almost 50%)
So, what are you talking about?
I had teached ocassionally at the university, just part-time and never been part of the faculty. I may agree with you that teachers are responsable of most of the problem, specially those of state owned schools and universities, whose interest is under most of those protests.
Well, on most of your preach on respect to police and terrorist attitude of certain students I agree, but those are consequence of forces that are behind the movement and weak attitud ao this government and those who preceeded.
On presidente Piñera, in my opinion it was a big dissapoint for all those who voted him thinking that he will lead a real change, I think he is more of the same.