2013-05-25T08:56:04-04:00 Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.voces.huffingtonpost.com/author/index.php?author=gabriel-sanchez-zinny Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Gabriel Sanchez Zinny Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.3294840 2013-05-21T12:14:33-04:00 2013-05-21T12:14:40-04:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/
But it is somewhat of an open question whether Latin America even wants more attention from Washington. The private sectors of Latin America and the United States -- as well as Canada and the EU -- are charging ahead with trade and investment of an unprecedented intensity. What does this portend for the future of our political relationships?

This is the central question that the Atlantic Council's new Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center seeks to answer in its founding report, The Trilateral Bond: Mapping a New Era for Latin America, the United States, and Europe. Written by a Transatlantic Task Force on Latin America composed of business leaders, academic experts, and policymakers and co-chaired by former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar and Senator Chris Dodd, our report tackles the common issues facing the US, Europe, and Latin America based on a new transatlantic partnership.

We argue in the report that "together, the United States, Europe, and Latin America should build a stronger, more equal trilateral partnership based on a community of interests and values -- this is in the economic, security and political interests of all three. Despite Latin America's expanding markets, rich energy and natural resources, and newfound confidence on the geopolitical stage, it has not been visible within the transatlantic relationship." Engaging Latin America as a peer in this relationship is the premise upon which progress in all other spheres -- economic, diplomatic, security, human rights and energy -- must be based.

Over the past decade, the region has grown faster than either the U.S. or the EU, which has returned to recession. Economic instability in the U.S. used to seriously disrupt its neighbors to the south, but Latin America weathered the 2008 crisis well, shrinking less and returning to growth faster.

It has also continued its deep economic ties with the U.S. and Europe: "The European Union is the largest single foreign investor in Latin America, accounting for 39 percent of total FDI in the region in 2011. The EU is also the leading recipient of Brazilian exports and its first trading partner, importing primarily agricultural goods and accounting for 21.7 percent of Brazil's total trade. The United States is the largest single national investor in the region and supplied 18 percent of total FDI there in 2011," according to our report. But at the same time, Latin America is diversifying and coming into its own as a player in international trade. The rise of multilatinas (Latin American multinationals) that are investing in places like Africa and China mean that the region's outward foreign direct investment has more than quadrupled since 2000.

Countries like Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Chile and Peru have all been transforming into mature markets. This means the freedom to pursue new trade opportunities, and the independence to chart its own course, without it threatening the foundations of our partnerships. Relations must continue to become more rational, more pragmatic, and more equal, as Latin America becomes more integrated with the rest of the world.

There are also challenges to a renewed transatlantic partnership, as we detail in the report. An important swathe of Latin America seems to have no desire for a better relationship, led by Venezuela, Bolivia, and Nicaragua -- instead, their northern neighbors are more useful as targets for domestic political populism. And the ongoing crisis of the Eurozone makes it more difficult for the EU to focus on its common foreign policy.

Nonetheless, with Latin America on the rise, there are many areas for cooperation, and many problems that demand closer ties. In a community of nations that shares a common set of historical references, philosophical roots, and cultural touchstones, a more active political and economic alliance must be the aspiration for policymakers, business, and thought leaders alike. In practice, our report touches on many of these specific areas, providing concrete recommendations for action. Some of these include:

Building a stronger trilateral transatlantic marketplace. "The three regions should work to build a transatlantic economy by reducing barriers, expanding trade, increasing capital investment, and boosting competitiveness. Using the opportunity presented by the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations, the three should establish a trilateral process aimed at removing barriers to trade and investment. Eventually, this dialogue should address the controversial topic of reducing US and EU agricultural subsidies that effectively restrict Latin America's most important export sector from those markets."

Launching a comprehensive trilateral energy dialogue to address the shifting global energy landscape and to share best practices across the broad sector of energy policy. "Latin America is already a major producer of energy, including oil and gas, hydro-electric and thermal energy, and biofuels. A stronger resource partnership would provide a strategic boost for a new transatlantic community as it seeks to remain competitive in an evolving global economy."

Addressing transnational crime and boosting public security. "The drug trade has for too long been identified with Latin America alone. In reality, it is a transatlantic -- even global-phenomenon that affects both day-to-day citizen security and the consolidation of democratic institutions. The United States and the European Union should expand efforts to prevent, treat, and reduce the harm associated with drug use and take steps to limit the cross-border flow of deadly assault weapons. These weapons spawn violence on America's streets and find their way wholesale to Latin America."

Education and human capital deserve their own chapter, given that the success of almost all other initiatives will be based on them. While the US, the EU and Latin America all represent different levels of educational quality, they face similar challenges to preparing their students for a high-skill work force. Quality education is key to building competitiveness in a globalized marketplace, and as such is the cornerstone of economic growth. As Assistant Secretary of State Roberta Jacobson argued at the report's launch, the middle class cannot continue to grow without advances in education. The United States, Europe, and Latin America can work together to shape more effective education policy that drives innovation.

Human capital also touches on a timely debate in the U.S. -- immigration policy. Facilitating the movement of those with the ability to contribute to growth and innovation will reinforce the integration of the trilateral marketplace. As we argue, "this should include developing trilateral 'fast track' visa and border entry schemes for businesspeople as well as more visas for highly skilled individuals." In addition, "Governments should reduce legal and institutional barriers to crossover between universities and the private sector."

Finally, we argue that to pursue these goals, we must strengthen the trilateral institution frameworks that can ensure routine consultation and promote collaboration. Some existing institutions, such as the Organization of American States (OAS) and the EU-Latin American summit process can carry some of this weight. But there should be more trilateral integration, as well as more recognition of Latin America's growing importance within global multinational institutions such as the UN Security Council and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

After decades of economic and political turmoil, Latin America is taking its place as a transatlantic peer, closely related to the U.S. and Europe by a common history and shared aspirations. It is time for the three regions to recognize this reality, and reshape their relationship to reflect it.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.3146551 2013-04-24T09:32:19-04:00 2013-04-24T21:51:10-04:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/ sostiene Thomas Friedman, columnista del New York Times.

Los MOOCs (massive open online courses) han roto el paradigma de la universidad tal como lo conocíamos. La industria de la educación universitaria ha comenzado a parecerse a otros sectores donde lo global y transnacional es la norma. Mientras por siglos la educación fue tratada como un bien doméstico, no transable, hoy se ha vuelto un bien comercializable a través de países y regiones. La educación online o virtual existe hace mucho tiempo en América Latina, con el Instituto Tecnológico de Monterrey como uno de los principales líderes, además del Instituto SENA o la Universidad Nacional en Colombia, y la Universidad de Brasilia o la Luterana en Brasil. Pero el surgimiento de los MOOCs, de la mano de las principales universidades del mundo, ha contribuido a darles legitimidad y credibilidad a las carreras y títulos.

Algunos analistas sostienen que estamos ante un "momento Napster" en la industria, haciendo alusión a cómo aquella compañía transformó en su momento la manera en que la música era distribuida y compartida, impactando para siempre a la industria de la música. Pero otros dicen que este es más bien un "momento Netflix", aludiendo a que las Universidades están todavía en control de su contenido, mientras lo que se encuentra en pleno cambio es la forma en que llegan a sus clientes.

No queda claro todavía cómo terminarán de moldearse los MOOCs, cuál será el modelo que asegure su sustentabilidad económica, cómo se acreditarán las carreras, pero con seguridad traerá mayor competencia a la industria, menores precios y una oferta más variada.

Pero tal vez la novedad más llamativa es que llevará a la industria a un modelo que no tendrá fronteras ni en la producción ni el consumo. Hasta ahora la educación como bien transable lograba un alcance muy reducido, atado a la necesidad entre otros de movilizarse físicamente a otra ciudad o país para poder consumirla. Los recientes MOOCs están resquebrajando esta realidad.

En América Latina, las cifras de graduación universitaria siguen siendo bajas, donde los estudiantes provienen de una población que solo el 50% de los alumnos se gradúan de secundaria. Las tasas de graduación universitaria más altas corresponden hoy a países desarrollados, donde más de 30 jóvenes cada 100 en edad para graduarse han obtenido un título universitario. En Argentina son menos de 14 jóvenes cada 100, un número inferior al de Panamá, Brasil, México, Chile y Cuba. Será difícil expandirlo si no se incorpora tecnología en el sector.

Estos cambios no sólo están transformando el mercado de la educación universitaria sino que también impactarán en el rol de los profesores, dándoles oportunidad de llegar a muchos más alumnos. Tal fue el caso de Udacity, fundada por Sebastian Thrun, profesor de Stanford que al verse impedido de expandir sus cursos fuera de los créditos de la universidad decidió crear y lanzar su propia plataforma de enseñanza virtual para ponerla al alcance global de manera gratuita, con miles de estudiantes basados en más de 15 países.

Los MOOCs en Estados Unidos están enseñando a más de 2.4 millones de alumnos en más de 200 cursos de 33 universidades, americanas e internacionales. Los más destacados son Coursera, una alianza que hoy alcanza a más de una veintena de universidades, EdX, lanzada en conjunto por la Universidad de Harvard y el MIT, y Udacity.

Como siempre en la incorporación de tecnología a la educación, Brasil ha tomado la delantera en la región, con ejemplos como Veduca, con mas de un millón de estudiantes, y una capitalización de $740,000 liderada por Mountain do Brazil y otros 500 start-up brasileros que se sumaron también a esta innovación.

Si bien el formato final que adquirirán los MOOCs está todavía por definirse, ya han generado una gran contribución a la educación. Por un lado, estimulando el debate público sobre la necesidad de introducir tecnología y cambiar el modelo de la universidad tradicional. Por otro, obligando a las universidades que quieran preservar su sustentabilidad, a adoptar una estrategia online y enfocarse en incorporar estas nuevas tecnologías.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.3116042 2013-04-19T15:39:25-04:00 2013-04-19T15:39:30-04:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/
Access to education is a major plank of this effort, listed at number two out of the eight Millennium Goals, adopted in 2005 at the follow up World Summit meeting in New York. While other goals include eliminating extreme poverty, empowering women, and combating disease, in the realm of education, the focus of the effort is to deliver universal primary education. Specifically, world leaders committed a deadline of 2015 to achieve both the enrollment in and completion of a full course of primary schooling for any child, girl or boy.

In the wake of such high level commitments, there has been important progress. According to the Brookings Center for Universal Education, the past decade has seen a surge in primary school enrollments, and developing countries have collectively raised their education spending from 2.9 to 3.8 percent of GDP.

All the same, full access to education is still an unfulfilled goal. According to UNESCO's latest Education For All (EFA) Global Monitoring Report, as of 2012, 120 million children either never make it to school or drop out before their fourth year. In addition, in 123 low- and middle-income countries there are nearly 200 million children that haven't completed primary education, and out of those, 58 percent are female. This is a problem that starts early: Out of 650 million children worldwide of preschool age, only 164 million are actually enrolled.

But in addition to ongoing problems with access, there is an increasing understanding that access alone won't solve our education crisis. Quality is just as critical -- getting our children into classrooms achieves little if they are not learning when they get there. As World Bank President Jim Yong Kim writes, "Reaching the classroom is only the first step. Every child should have the opportunity not only to go to school but to acquire the knowledge and skills she needs to lead a healthy, productive life, care for herself and her family, and become an empowered citizen."

Unfortunately, the same UNESCO study tells us that at least 250 million primary school children can't meet minimum standards for reading, writing, and arithmetic -- including those who have spend up to four years in school. Surprisingly, the UN Development goals make no mention of quality, or any sort of achievement benchmarks.

For this reason, UNESCO has joined with the Brookings Institute to create the Learning Metrics Task Force, a year long project to shift the conversation from access-only to access in addition to measurable learning results. The task force will engage high level policy makers, technical experts, and other practitioners to build consensus and create guidelines for the evaluation of learning.

It remains to be seen how effective this effort will be -- but at the very least it is positive movement in the right direction. The Task Force is not overly ambitious; it advocates, for instance, for tests and other measurements that will "take into account internationally comparable assessments in some countries and alternative assessment in others," although it will likely be hard to develop truly comparable international measures if the sources and methodology are different. The group does focus on six specific areas for measurement, which include completion indicators, school readiness indicators, reading comprehension tests, and numeracy indicators.

But we can and must push forward faster. As the UN is developing its post-2015 development agenda, the international community should be more ambitious, introducing more innovative attempts to reach our goals. After all, the Task Force estimates that 171 million people could be lifted out of poverty if all students in low-income countries achieved only basic reading skills. Repeating the formulas of the past will not get us where we need to be, and it will be millions of children who will bear the brunt of further delay.

As the Task Force states, "learning and education are inter-related but not the same." Students in all countries will increasingly need a broader range of abilities -- the so-called 21st century skills -- that can only come from a more holistic approach to the education system. This means that an updated conception of educational development needs to consider health and nutrition, as well as stable family life.

To achieve this, the next round of UN goals must not only innovate but also broaden its focus by engaging an expanded range of stakeholders. This means, among other things, a better engagement with the private sector -- and not just as a funding source, but as innovative providers. Private groups can push ahead with new technologies and blended learning alternatives to traditional education. Since the 2000 summit, technological advancement has changed the equation in almost every industry -- except education.

Progress on increasing access is encouraging; it shows we can advance in areas in which we put our time, money, and commitment. Now it is time to expand that commitment to quality, and make sure our children are truly developing.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2980111 2013-04-01T15:49:01-04:00 2013-04-01T15:45:12-04:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/
The evidence is strong that beginning education earlier has outsized effects on students' lifetime learning -- and thus, earning -- abilities. As President Obama put it, "study after study shows that the earlier a child begins learning, the better he or she does down the road... For poor kids who need help the most, this lack of access to preschool education can shadow them for the rest of their lives." Indeed, Brookings estimates that high quality universal preschool could add $2 trillion to annual U.S. GDP for a cost of $59 billion.

Unfortunately, this is not an area in which the U.S. has historically had much success, despite a number of efforts. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which serves as a clearinghouse of statistical information for the world's developed countries, the U.S. ranks 28th out of 38 countries in terms of the number of four year olds attending preschool. And according to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the situation in the U.S. is even worse for minorities: Latino children of 3-5 years attend preschool at a rate of 56 percent, compared to 67 percent for white students of the same age. The results can be seen down the road, as Latinos have lower test scores and higher high school dropout rates than the average American -- what is known as the achievement gap.

Even though there has existed for some time now a consensus among most scholars and policymakers regarding the importance of early education -- or what is more broadly referred to Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) -- the programs that have been pursued have achieved lackluster results at best. President Obama may have renewed national attention to this issue with his State of the Union, but the US has had a program focused on early childhood development since the 1960s -- "Head Start," begun in 1965, under the leadership of President Lyndon Johnson and his expansive new "war on poverty."

Recent research has called into question Head Start's effectiveness. Currently, as Grover Whitehurst of Brookings points out, the program spends about $8,000 per child per year for each of its one million participants, compared with about $700 per child per year for the roughly 21 million disadvantaged children in the rest of the system. Despite this funding differential, the Department of Health and Human Services' Head Start Impact Study -- one of the most involved and rigorous federal performance studies ever carried out -- found that Head Start "does not improve the school readiness of children from low income families." While there is a small positive impact on performance for the duration of the Head Start program, that boost does not persist through later stages of schooling.

This suggests that not all early childhood programs are created equal -- and that spending a lot of money is not a guarantee of lasting success. While there is a broad consensus among both practitioners and policy wonks that ECEC programs are critical, there is less agreement as to how to get there. How can programs like Head Start be improved?

One possible answer, which may surprise those in the U.S., is that the president may find answers by looking south, to Mexico and Brazil. Both of these countries, even while dealing with child poverty more dire than that of the U.S., have implemented successful childhood development programs. Mexico's Oportunidades, for example, provides poor families with conditional cash transfers (CCTs) based on children attending classes and regular health clinic visits. Importantly, while it begins with preschool, the educational aspect of the program continues through high school. As a result, children who participate in the program have more balanced diet, fewer illnesses, and higher school enrollment -- 20 percent more for girls and 10 percent more for boys.

Brazil's Bolsa Familia operates on the same principle, seeking to improve the overall human development of the poorest children with targeted cash payments dependent on school attendance and health care visits. Currently, the program benefits nearly 14 million families, and is credited with helping reduce the number of people in extreme poverty from 14 percent to 4.2 percent over the past decade.

As President Obama continues to sell his plan for universal preschool, the devil will be in the details -- the amount of responsibility and accountability devolved to the states, the income brackets that will qualify for inclusion, teacher credentials and evaluation, and the role of the private sector. As the debate continues, however, the examples of Mexico and Brazil should teach us the importance of a holistic approach to early development: one that that addresses health and nutrition as well as classroom time - and that continues to support children's development beyond just preschool.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2758685 2013-03-01T18:56:10-05:00 2013-05-01T05:12:01-04:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/
Part of the story of improved Latino graduation rates is the general national improvement in educational access. In 2010, nation-wide graduation rates rose to over 78 percent, the highest level since 1974. Latinos benefited from that overall trend: the most recent numbers indicate that more than 70 percent of Latino students graduated on time in 2010 -- a number that represents an increase of 10 percentage points in just five years. But another aspect of the trend towards improvement is the steady rise of Latinos as a share of total K-12 enrollment: for the first time in U.S. history, one in four public school elementary students is Latino.

What is behind this decrease in dropouts? There appear to be several relevant reasons. One may be that a weaker economy and a tepid labor market encourages more students than normal to remain in school, since dropping out and finding quality employment becomes more difficult. There are also demographic factors at play as well. Mark Hugo Lopez, Associate Director of the Pew Hispanic Center, argues that as a new generation of Latinos born in the U.S. come of schooling age, they are more likely than their parents to enroll in and complete their education at all levels.

But these improvements, while heartening, are far from satisfactory. The Latino high school graduation rate is still below average, far below that of white students, who graduate at an 83 percent rate, and even further below Asian and Pacific Islander students, of whom 93 percent graduate. And while some states with large Latino populations are performing above average -- in Texas, for example, 82 percent of Latinos graduate with a high school degree -- in other states, the situation continues to be dire. In New York, only 69 percent of Latinos graduate, while Minnesota and Nevada are the worst performing states, with 51 percent and 53 percent Latino graduation rates, respectively.

An educated, well-prepared labor force is a bedrock necessity for a knowledge- and innovation-based economy -- and much of the rest of the world is outstripping the U.S. in that respect. The U.S. once had the highest high school and university graduation rates in the world, but now, according to the OECD, we rank a mere 22nd in that regard. In the US, both Latinos as well as our overall graduation rate are well below the OECD average of 84 percent, while a diverse set of countries streak past us: Finland and South Korea, for instance, each have 94 percent graduation rates, and Japan has a 96 percent rate.

Given that Latinos make up an increasingly large proportion of the U.S. student body, such high dropout rates will negatively impact competitiveness, despite the signs of improvement. Latinos account for more than 12 million of the nation's 55 million publically-enrolled K-12. In addition, while Latino college enrollment has grown at pace of 15 percent in 2011 to a record of 2.1 million enrolled, we are still at a place in which only 47 percent of Hispanics complete a college degree, compared to 63 percent nationally. Such numbers of those not finishing even a basic formal education are far too high.

This becomes clearer as the costs and benefits for each individual are considered. Graduation from high school has a deep personal impact on a student's development over the entire course of their lives. A recent study by the educational reform organization America's Promise Alliance, founded by Colin Powell, estimates that those that graduate from high school earn a total of $130,000 more over the course of their lifetime than non-graduates. Multiply that number by 12 million, and the implications for national prosperity become stark.

A number of states have undertaken efforts to improve their situations. Florida is one, having led the reform effort since 1999, with impressive results. Florida districts changed their leadership and trained new teachers, gave low income parents greater choices in charter schools and scholarships, and invested heavily in early childhood literacy. While scores stagnated in most of the country last year, SAT scores for Florida's Hispanic students increased. In the City of New Orleans, as well, after several reforms, graduation rates are up, and failing schools are down.

In addition to these reforms, as America's Promise Alliance points out, there are a number of approaches that states could follow to cut down the dropout rates in particular. Better data collection can spur greater public accountability. Stable, long term funding mechanisms can ensure the longevity of reform. And experimentation with other models at the state level can weed out the good ideas from the bad and serve as an example across the nation.

The recent decline in dropout rates is an excellent sign -- but it is only the beginning of an effort to bring U.S. schools back up to par with their world class origins, and close the persistent achievement gap.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2758834 2013-02-25T10:44:28-05:00 2013-04-27T05:12:01-04:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/ noticia de la adquisición de la compañía de educación McGraw Hill, de 113 años de historia, con presencia en 150 países, por el fondo de inversión Apollo Global Management. Pero esta transacción parecería representar una de las más claras tendencias en los cambios que se avecinan en la industria de libros de textos escolares y contenido educativo en la región.

La transacción no es solamente significativa en términos económicos, sino que más bien habla sobre la transformación por la que está atravesando el sector educación, y en particular los libros de textos que desde hace décadas son el principal instrumento proveedor de contenidos en las escuelas. "Esta operación es un despertador, un llamado de atención para toda la industria editorial" me comentó Diego Meirino, Director General de contenidos y soluciones educativas de Carvajal, una de las principales compañías de educación de América Latina. "Los que editamos libros de textos en formato tradicional tenemos que reinventarnos, o prepararnos a ver disminuir nuestro market-share", agregó.

McGraw Hill ha dividido sus unidades de negocios, vendiendo la parte educativa, en 2500 millones de dólares, y quedándose con los servicios financieros, en particular la agencia de rating Standards and Poors, con Capital IQ Tools, que provee servicios de análisis financiero, y Platts, un vendedor de información sobre los mercados de commodities.

El fondo de inversión Apollo (que no guarda relación con la empresa Apollo que maneja University of Phoenix) fue fundado hace 22 años, maneja más de 40 billones de dólares en activos, y ha invertido en la industria del entretenimiento como la empresa de cine AMC, de cruceros Norwegian Cruise, hoteles, real state y CORE Media Group. Tal vez incursionará en lo que muchos han llamado Edutainment, la intersección de ambas industrias, o tratará de acelerar el cambio de McGrawHill hacia la provisión de contenidos digitales, de forma similar a como hizo Apex Partners cuando compró Thomson Learning, ahora llamado Cengage Learning. "A partir de la adquisición en el 2007 por parte de Apex, orientamos nuestra compañía hacia los desafíos del siglo XXI, pasando de productos a soluciones educativas sofisticadas con un elevado componente de innovación tecnológica", señala Juan Maria Segura, Academic Senior Director de Cengage Learning para Latinoamérica.

El negocio de los libros de texto parecía estable y predecible hace unos años, apoyado por el crecimiento demográfico, el aumento del acceso a la escuela de muchísimos jóvenes, y la economía de escala en la producción de libros de un mismo contenido, con un principal comprador, el estado, que representa del 70- al 90% del mercado. Pero esta realidad está siendo irrumpida por la masiva incorporación de nuevas tecnologías en todas las industrias, incluida la educación. Pero el dilema es que si bien pareciera que el futuro cambiará por completo la industria de libro de texto escolar, en la actualidad sigue funcionando en muchos mercados, reduciendo la necesidad o urgencia de cambio de estas compañías.

Las nuevas tecnologías están des-intermediando todas los sectores de la economía, desde el consumo minorita hasta la producción, con el advenimiento de las tecnologías de manufactura 3D. Pero no mucho ha cambiado todavía en los sistemas educativos ni en las empresas que proveen gran parte de sus productos y servicios. La industria editorial está enfrentando profundos desafíos, y mucha competencia de gran cantidad de nuevas compañías introduciendo contenidos digitales y nuevas formas de enseñar y aprender en las escuelas.

Los nuevos accionistas de McGrawHill, como pasó antes con Cengage, y en cierta medida está intentándolo Pearson con la adquisición de empresas como Connection Academy, y su reciente lanzamiento de Pearson Catalyst, una incubadora de nuevos emprendimientos de educación y tecnología, pareciera que traerán cambios que ya se están observando en diferentes distritos escolares y escuelas, donde gracias a la tecnología se está personalizando la educación, a medida de la capacidad de aprendizaje e intereses de los estudiantes.

Las tradicionales compañías de libros de textos y contenidos en papel son las mejor posicionadas para capturar estos nuevos mercados, ya que tienen liderazgo en la producción, los canales de ventas y distribución, pero tendrán que adaptarse a la sociedad del conocimiento, o terminar en las manos de nuevos jugadores.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2567050 2013-01-29T15:53:18-05:00 2013-03-31T05:12:01-04:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/
This is unfortunate, because the evidence on educational attainment, as demonstrated by recently released reports, including the important TIMSS and PIRLSS reading and math assessments, continues to show the extent to which America struggles in this area. Indeed, for all the debate over deficit reduction and national security, improving educational quality is one of the most critical challenges facing the U.S. if it hopes to maintain its international advantage in competitiveness and innovation.

While reform is reliably controversial, both left and right seem to agree that the Obama administration has introduced some important initiatives during its first term -- most notably, the Race to the Top program that incentivizes state-level reforms while leaving states flexibility in implementation. There is also the School Improvement Grants program, which focuses on improving low-performing schools, and the Supportive School Discipline Initiative, which begins to reform school disciplinary practices that disproportionately send minority students into the criminal justice system -- a dynamic known as the "school-to-prison pipeline."

It is in this context that Latinos, in particular, should take interest in what the administration plans for the second term. In 2012, Latinos voted nearly 3 to 1 in favor of President Obama, despite their generalized disappointment over the stagnation of immigration reform legislation. And while immigration reform was a cornerstone of the president's proposed agenda, Latinos should be at least as concerned, if not more, with the direction of educational policies that seek to shrink the so-called "achievement gap" between white and minority students.

This gap is large, and by many measurements growing. In nearly every educational indicator, Latinos (like African Americans) perform worse on average than white students. Nationwide, Latinos have a 31 percent dropout rate, a full 9 percent worse than average. They score consistently below average on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) exams, and only 47.2 percent graduate from college, compared to 63 percent nationally. In some states, the numbers are even worse -- in Minnesota, there is a 33 percent gap between the white and Latino high school graduation rates, and the District of Colombia had the second biggest gap, of 30 percent.

While the achievement gap is a problem in itself, it is also a key driver of economic inequality, and thus, a major threat to U.S. economic performance. American innovation and productivity -- and, by extension, competitiveness in the global economy -- has a lot to do with its human capital. According to Pew, a record 23 percent of the nation's 55 million K-12 students are now Latino. Given those numbers, it becomes clear that it is simply not possible for the U.S. to maintain its long-term human capital advantage with such a large chunk of its future workforce under-educated and under-prepared.

The question is, then, what fundamentally drives this gap. While some states, like Florida, have implemented school reforms that saw improvements in Latino educational performance, it seems increasingly likely that the problem may run much deeper. A number of researchers and reformers are arguing that it is primarily socio-economic factors -- particularly, the influence of poverty -- that negatively impact students' ability to learn. If true, it has serious implications -- namely, that reform approaches that fail to address systemic poverty will be largely ineffective.

For instance, the most recent TIMSS-PIRLS report points to poverty rates as the most significant driver of inequality in achievement results across the U.S. Not only that, but schools with higher numbers of low income students also performed worse compared with international averages -- while at the same time, the scores of the highest performers get even better.

This wouldn't come as a surprise to readers of Paul Tough's new book, How Children Succeed: Grit, Curiosity, and the Hidden Power of Character, which argues that the stressors of poverty -- inadequate nutrition and housing, abuse or lack of emotional support, and parental divorce or incarceration, among others -- lead to the stunted development of the skills and character necessary for educational success. Tough argues persuasively that it is not IQ or traditional "cognitive" ability that predicts academic success, but rather character traits such as self-discipline, curiosity, resilience, and optimism -- precisely the traits that a childhood in poverty makes it hard to come by.

As education expert Thomas Toch points out in his review of How Children Succeed, the educational reform camp has been split between two sides: those that focus on poverty, and those that focus on school reforms. In the U.S., the latter camp has largely dominated, including within the Obama Administration, leading to a focus on teacher training and state-level governance. This is not necessarily an issue that breaks down along traditional ideological lines, as conservative commentators like Charles Murray have also focused on the breakdown of traditional organizations -- particularly family and the church -- that can give struggling kids the support they need.

What does this all mean for Latinos? If President Obama is truly interested in improving their situation, he cannot only focus on immigration reform, nor on school reform. As Tough says, while "the education debate usually focuses on issues inside the classroom, these don't accurately represent the biggest obstacles to academic success that poor children often face."]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2503340 2013-01-18T11:09:57-05:00 2013-03-20T05:12:01-04:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/ Educación para Todos de la UNESCO, basado en los resultados de las últimas evaluaciones PISA, en Brasil, México y Uruguay, los hijos de padres pertenecientes al cuartil social superior obtuvieron resultados en matemática entre un 25% y un 30% más altos que aquellos en el cuartil más pobre.

El debate sobre la reforma educativa, tanto en América Latina como Estados Unidos, se ha enfocado en factores que se producen dentro de la escuela o del aula, como el entrenamiento de los maestros, la evaluación de los alumnos o el uso de tecnologías. Si bien son todos temas fundamentales para mejorar la educación, dejan de lado otros asuntos principales, relacionados con las capacidades cognitivas de los alumnos, las condiciones de sus familias, o la situación inicial de pobreza de la que provienen.

En su más reciente libro, Paul Tough realiza una muy interesante explicación de estos factores. Siguiendo la tradición de otros autores, como Steven Brill en Class Warfare o Tony Wagner en Creating Innovators, el autor nos introduce en nuevas teorías, investigaciones y conclusiones científicas a través de la historia de varios personajes, desde alumnos hasta docentes y emprendedores sociales ya muy reconocidos en Estados Unidos, como David Levin, fundador de KIPP, y Dominic Randolph, director de la escuela Riverdale Country School.

Paul Tough muestra con claridad en How Children Succeed que las condiciones socioeconómicas de los niños impactan en la formación de su carácter y, por tanto, en sus logros educativos. "En rigor de verdad, los chicos que crecen en familias pobres en Estados Unidos están teniendo un desempeño muy malo en las escuelas. Ahora, con mucha más información disponible después de la implementación de No Child Left Behind acerca del desempeño educativo y las condiciones socioeconómicas, está claro que la brecha educativa entre los alumnos ricos y pobres se está ampliando".

Esto es particularmente cierto entre la población hispana, la primera minoría étnica en los EEUU. De acuerdo a un informe del Departamento de Educación de los EEUU en base a la última evaluación PISA del año 2009, en la escala de lectura los estudiantes blancos y asiáticos obtuvieron resultados promedio más altos (525 y 541 respectivamente) que los puntajes de la OCDE y EEUU, mientras que los estudiantes negros e hispánicos obtuvieron promedios inferiores (441 y 166 respectivamente). Por otro lado, si bien registran altas tasas de enrolamiento, la tasa de deserción en este grupo es la más alta del país.

"El debate educativo está usualmente enfocado en temas internos de las aulas, pero éstos no son los obstáculos más graves para el progreso académico que los alumnos pobres, y sobre todo los muy pobres, a menudo enfrentan: a saber, un hogar y una comunidad que crea altos niveles de estrés, y la ausencia de una relación estable con sus tutores que les permitiría a los niños manejar ese estrés", argumenta Tough en su libro.

El desarrollo educativo y más tarde profesional de los estudiantes tiene más que ver con su carácter, con cualidades como perseverancia, consistencia, curiosidad, optimismo y control personal, que con la inteligencia o memoria, resultados medidos por exámenes escolares como el SAT. Ejemplos como el de KIPP, con su reporte o boletín de carácter, o el modelo desarrollado por Riversdale Country School son muy buenos ejemplos de cómo llevar este hallazgo a la práctica.

Tough desarrolla e introduce sus conceptos a partir de los resultados e historias de una nueva generación de investigadores enfocados en la neurociencia y de las historias de las niñas y niños que ellos han ayudado. También refuerza el concepto de que los padres y las familias en general tienen un importante impacto en el desarrollo cognitivo de los alumnos y en su preparación para la adultez, especialmente en condiciones de bajos ingresos.

Como dice el autor, los niños que crecen en ambientes familiares estresantes, ya sea por temas emocionales o materiales, generalmente tienen mayores dificultades para concentrarse, para sentarse quietos, para recuperarse de los errores y de los tropiezos, o también seguir sugerencias y directivas, todas variables con un impacto directo en su performance escolar.

Los argumentos de Tough, que han generado mucho debate en Estados Unidos, parecen darle la razón a los pensadores de centroizquierda, que sugieren que con buenas políticas públicas se puede influir en las condiciones socioeconómicas y asi impactar en los condicionamientos de los estudiantes de menores recursos sobre sus resultados educativos. Pero también le da razón al ala más conservadora del debate, aceptando que el carácter, las cualidades personales, y el rol de la familia son fundamentales para el éxito educativo y profesional de los estudiantes. Programas como Oportunidades en México, o Bolsa Familia en Brasil, o Juntos en Perú, parecieran apuntar en esa línea. Tal vez Estados Unidos pueda aprender de sus vecinos el Sur en esta área.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2398398 2013-01-02T19:02:57-05:00 2013-03-04T05:12:01-05:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/
In the 1980s, the Hispanic population of the U.S. was barely a third of its current level. As a consequence, there were only 400 Hispanic-owned businesses, with a total combined revenue of only $1 million. But today, Hispanics are living a completely different experience in terms of both population size and business acumen than we were only two decades ago. We have transitioned from being a mostly irrelevant minority to being a political and economic force that cannot be ignored.

Today, not only have the numbers of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. increased, but so have the millions in legitimate business revenue. In 2011, Hispanic Business calculated that Hispanic companies in the U.S. combined for a total revenue of $37.8 billion -- an 18.6 percent increase from 2010. In addition, Hispanic owned businesses account for over 128,000 employees. In an economy that was shedding jobs at an alarming rate after the 2008 financial crisis, and in which the unemployment rate continues to be painfully high, Hispanic business have increased their payrolls by 12.1 percent since 2006.

Through the early 2000s, the state of California led in most measures of Hispanic activity. However, by 2005 the Sunshine State had overtaken it. Hispanic Business reported that Florida-based Hispanic-owned companies brought in more than $15 billion in revenue in 2011 after making $11 billion the year before. In total, the companies included in Hispanic Business' Top 20 list employed over 24,000 people last year. This list was led by Brightstar Corp., a privately held company founded in 1997 to provide services to the telecommunications industry, whose 2011 revenue was some $5.7 billion.

Although Florida now leads the pack in terms of Hispanic entrepreneurship, California continues to stand out as a base for Hispanic business. The top 20 California companies in the 2009 Hispanic Business 500 Ranking produced combined revenues of $5 billion in 2008. One of these top companies, based in Long Beach, California, is Molina Healthcare. Molina defied the terrible economic context of 2007-08 by increasing revenue by 24 percent, from $2.5 billion to $3.1 billion. California's biggest employment magnet sectors were energy and retail, with increases of 62.1 and 45.4 percent, respectively.

Indeed, when it comes to Hispanic-owned business, most sectors saw increased hiring even while the rest the country was seeing contracting employment across almost all sectors. The Hispanic-owned service sector, for instance, grew 41 percent in 2011 alone, while wholesale followed with 19 percent growth and transportation with a nine percent increase. Exemplifying this new era, the Hispanic-owned Mike Shaw automotive dealership won the Time Dealer of the Year, making it the first ever minority group dealership to win the prestigious recognition.

In our current political moment, our national debate -- when it isn't obsessed with wrangling over tax cuts and spending priorities -- too often sees Hispanics as a "problem" to be solved. This has never been further from the truth, and it's a breath of fresh air to see the Hispanic minority generating employment and making an outsized contribution to the prosperity of our nation. Despite the prevailing mood of pessimism that has seemed to permeate the US, the immigrant's dream of social mobility based on opportunity and hard work -- on which this country was founded -- is still far from dead.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2303858 2012-12-14T17:46:57-05:00 2013-02-13T05:12:01-05:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/ The New Industrial Revolution, (o en su traducción al español: "Hacedores, La Nueva Revolución Industrial), publicada por Crown Business en Octubre.

Por años, Anderson ha venido describiendo el modo en que internet está cambiando el modo como interactuamos -social, económica y culturalmente- desde su puesto de editor en jefe de la revista norteamericana Wired. Sus últimos dos libros, The Long Tail y Free: the Future of a Radical Price, han generado nuevas miradas sobre el estado cambiante del comercio, la construcción de marca y la fijación de precios en la sociedad del conocimiento.

En su nuevo libro, Anderson nos introduce en el concepto de "hacedores", individuos que hoy se cuentan en varios miles, que están expandiendo la cultura del "hágalo Ud. mismo". Por supuesto, el emprendedor no es una figura nueva. Pero de acuerdo a Makers, lo que ha cambiado es que "la nueva industria es una fuerza económica poderosa no porque cualquier negocio se vuelva gigante, sino porque la tecnología hace posible que cientos de miles de pequeños negocios y emprendedores puedan encontrar sus clientes, formar sus comunidades".

Internet, en otras palabras, amplifica el potencial humano y expande el conjunto de talento humano disponible -al mismo tiempo que expande el mercado para ese talento. No sólo permite que cualquiera cree e innove, sino que también facilita una rápida venta, distribución y diseminación de los productos y servicios.

Esta nueva realidad económica afecta profundamente el crecimiento económico y el empleo. Representa una "democratización" de la producción -o para robar el concepto de Thomas Friedman, "aplana" el escenario económico. En otras palabras, gracias a la tecnología más individuos se convierten en emprendedores al proveerles un acceso rápido a las herramientas para convertirse tanto en inventores como en productores.

Mucho de esto ya lo estamos viendo, por ejemplo en la publicación de libros y otras fuentes de información. Una escritora en ascenso no necesita depender de un gran editor para aprobar su libro y asumir su distribución. Puede escribir sus libros ella misma, publicarlos en Amazon.com y venderlos directamente a sus lectores. Lo mismo aplica si produce contenidos de matemática o dicta una clase en sitios de currícula digital como Coursera o Udacity. Anderson lo define así: "la revolución digital ha estado largamente limitada a la pantalla".

Desde la revolución industrial, las grandes empresas han tendido a dominar la producción para el consumo y de gran escala. Aún hoy, el "mundo atomizado" aún se muestra dominante. El mismo Anderson admite que "el mundo de los átomos es al menos cinco veces mayor que el mundo de los bits". En el libro, esta afirmación es respaldada por datos como los de Citibank y Oxford Economics, según quienes la economía digital genera unos US$20 trillones en facturación, mientas la economía tradicional cerca de US$130 trillones.

El hecho de que el paradigma productivo esté cambiando, aunque lentamente, tendrá implicancias claves - como comprendió nada menos que Karl Marx al afirmar que aquellos que controlan los medios de producción retienen el poder en la sociedad. Pero mientras se trata de un proceso lento, es también un proceso necesario, particularmente en las economías en desarrollo en las que el sector industrial juega un rol menor en el PBI y concentra una proporción menor de la fuerza laboral. En palabras de Anderson: "los potenciales emprendedores e inventores no están más a merced de grandes empresas para producir sus ideas".

La web ha creado miles de mercados nuevos y abiertos, y el nuevo movimiento de "hardware-abierto" es a las industrias de producción de bienes físicos lo que las fuentes abiertas al sector del software. Incluso los modos en que los emprendedores obtienen financiamiento está cambiando: el financiamiento colectivo está reemplazando cada vez más al capital de riesgo o los préstamos bancarios, con los innovadores apelando al esfuerzo colectivo de individuos que brindan sus recursos para financiar sus proyectos.

Las ideas de Anderson guardan un potencial poderoso para América Latina, donde el crecimiento económico logrado en la última década y apoyado en la producción de commodities ha incrementado la renta, disminuido la pobreza, y expandido la clase media. Pero no bastará con la productividad creciente, la innovación acelerada, y un mayor puñado de emprendedores dinámicos creando pequeñas y medianas empresas para llevar a la región a un nuevo nivel de desarrollo. Lamentablemente, América Latina aún enfrenta desafíos importantes en términos de acceso a crédito y desigualdad en el acceso a una educación de calidad -el tipo de capital humano crucial para crear una economía cimentada en productos de alto valor agregado y servicios para el consumo local y global.

Es probable que no sea fácil lidiar con estos cambios, pero ya no pueden ser ignorados. En un contexto global signado por la superación de la última crisis económica y por economías que buscan su propio camino al desarrollo, Chris Anderson trae una perspectiva necesaria: una visión optimista del crecimiento económico basado en la combinación de creatividad humana y las tecnologías del siglo XXI.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2218531 2012-11-30T16:25:33-05:00 2013-01-30T05:12:01-05:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/ margin of 72 to 23 percent -- even more resoundingly than 2008, when he won 67 to Senator McCain's 31 percent. Not only did Obama win a larger share of Latinos, but they also comprised a larger portion of the total electorate: 10 percent, up from 9 percent in 2008.

Many analyses pin this lopsided margin on the candidates' positions on stereotypically "Latino issues." Governor Romney's sharp turn to the right on immigration and his harsh rhetoric on the need for "self-deportation" surely mattered, as did the Obama Administration's June decision to halt deportation of nearly one million undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as minors.

As The Wall Street Journal put it in a Nov. 14 column, "polls regularly show that immigration is not a priority for Hispanic voters, but how border policy is discussed still matters as a threshold and symbolic issue... we are a long way from Ronald Reagan's welcoming GOP." (The Journal also notes that this rhetoric also alienates other minority voters, such as Asian Americans.)

But Republicans must realize that it is a gross oversimplification to think that the answer to their demographic problems is as simple as softening their rhetoric. Channeling more enthusiasm for immigrants is a cosmetic solution at best. Troublingly for conservatives, evidence is growing that Latinos support Democrats because of a broad range of policy reasons, including support for a more robust welfare state, and greater investment in education and health care.

This is not to say that Latinos automatically back all government initiatives. We by and large come from countries where the rule of law is weaker than it is in the U.S. The lack of meritocratic systems and rampant favoritism mean that government is more often than not standing in the way of our personal development -- not facilitating it. Thus, the higher value that Latinos place on personal responsibility and industriousness, over and above other ethnic groups.

Indeed, Pew's attitude surveys show that, if anything, Latinos possess a greater faith in hard work and meritocracy than the average American. Seventy-five percent say that those who work hard can get ahead, versus 58 percent of all Americans who think so. This shouldn't be surprising; many Latinos have risked their lives crossing a militarized border in able to find a job and provide for their families. Yet, as David Brooks points out in The New York Times, the repetitive paeans to small government, the insistence that it is the lens through which to see all problems in America, simply don't resonate with Latinos. It seems most don't equate "big government" with wasteful subsidies and lazy "takers."

This conundrum should cause us to ask ourselves: Is "big" vs. "small" government even a valid question anymore? A robust defense of entrepreneurship and the private sector is still politically popular, but Latinos -- like many younger Americans - don't see this as mutually exclusive with more government. Rather, they are looking for effective government.

One of the primary reasons for this shift is awareness of America's increasing inequality. While middle class wages have stagnated -- remaining essentially the same since 1988 -- upper incomes have soared. This has happened at the same time that the productivity of American workers has surged, continuing to outstrip the rest of the world. Across the American middle class -- including, but not limited to, Latinos -- there is a growing realization that the gains from our unprecedented productivity are only accruing to a tiny minority.

What Latinos are looking for, then, is not a handout, but rather government policies that address the structural factors keeping the hard-working middle class from sharing in the growing economic pie. The factors, for instance, that make it unaffordable for a two-income household to send their children to college. The factors that make health care coverage or a comfortable retirement unachievable after a lifetime of hard work. That make it nearly impossible to find a job with a technical school degree, much less a GED.

Latinos are not looking for subsidies, but rather solutions. The talk radio charge that immigrants come here lured by welfare benefits is, as The Wall Street Journal points out, absurd. Not only are undocumented workers not eligible for Social Security, Medicaid, and other federal entitlements, they also, compared to the average American, use less of the social services that they are eligible for. What they are looking for is an opportunity to translate their industriousness into upward mobility -- the American dream.

Finally, for Latinos, family is at the center of that dream, but perhaps not in the way that Republicans would like to think. Latinos sent $69 billion back to Latin America in remittances in 2011, an 8 percent increase over 2010, and surveys back up the Latino commitment to traditional family values. But this doesn't automatically translate into conservative social views. When we think about family we don't think about hot button issues like gay marriage and abortion. In Latin America, we are less used to seeing these in the public policy discussion, and thus they don't have as much traction as Republicans are used to. "Family values" are, for us, not a religious talking point, but a concrete web of trust based on loving relationships that provides us the safety net and the connections to progress in life.

Until Republicans understand these fundamental attributes of the Latino experience, they will have trouble closing the gap with Democrats. A less dogmatic stance on immigration -- and a vocabulary that recognizes immigrants as an integral part of the American fabric -- is a good start. But what Latinos really care about -- like other Americans -- is finding concrete solutions to our economic challenges.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2129891 2012-11-14T11:56:35-05:00 2013-01-14T05:12:01-05:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/

Los sistemas educativos están enfrentando profundas transformaciones, tanto en los países desarrollados como en los emergentes, con una clara conciencia en ambos de la necesidad de mejorar la calidad de la educación, enseñando habilidades y conocimientos a los alumnos, acorde con las demandas sociales, culturales y laborales del siglo 21. El consenso sobre una mayor calidad es prácticamente unánime; mucho más difícil es encontrar las fórmulas para alcanzarlo. La tecnología podría ser un catalizar de estas reformas.

Tal vez una de las mayores disrupciones en la forma de enseñar y aprender que se han visto en los últimos años es la que trajo Khan Academy al mundo de la educación. Fundada por Salman Khan, un ex analista de inversión en Estados Unidos, esta Academia, una organización sin fines de lucro, ha traído al debate de políticas públicas la educación combinada, o personalizada, mediante el uso de tecnologías. Ha popularizado el uso de videos, lecciones, ejercitaciones y evaluaciones online.

La tecnología permite personalizar la enseñanza, y presentarla a medida de las capacidades e intereses de los estudiantes. Si usted está leyendo este artículo, probablemente asistió durante 12 años a la escuela con otros 30 alumnos, donde todos tenían que aprender de la misma manera, los mismo contenidos, y al mismo ritmo. Como dice Khan en su reciente libro The One World Schoolhouse, publicado por Hachette Book Group, "no era claro que este fuera el mejor sistema hace 100 años, pero con certeza no lo es más actualmente".

La visión de Khan Academy es proveer una educación de primera clase a todos, en cualquier lugar del mundo. Actualmente los sistemas educativos no lo logran. Los mejores maestros terminan la mayoría de las veces en las mejores escuelas, y los estudiantes más marginados asisten a escuelas con los peores recursos, infraestructura, y maestros. La tecnología puede cambiar todo esto, puede homogeneizar la calidad educativa hacia arriba, hacia mayores niveles de calidad, para todos. Como sostiene Khan en su obra "no existe una razón económica para que estudiantes en cualquier lugar, no tengan acceso a las mismas lecciones que recién los hijos de Bill Gates".

¿Cuándo se concentran más los alumnos? ¿Aprenden mejor matemática por las mañanas o las tardes? ¿Retienen más conocimientos cuando sus padres están en la casa o de viaje? Por supuesto que la respuesta depende de cada individuo, sostiene Salman Khan, en su libro. Y continua: "dadas todas estas variaciones que afectan el aprendizaje de los niños, ¿porque todavía insistimos que la enseñanza y el aprendizaje tienen que darse en una clase, al impersonal ritmo de campanas y timbres?"

Muchos de estos cambios ya se han visto a nivel universitario, donde las instituciones educativas han sido más innovadores en incorporar nuevas tecnologías, y han surgido variadas iniciativas que están transformando el sector, como Udacity, Cousera (creado por profesores de Stanford, Michigan, Penn, y Princeton) y la empresa conjunta EdX, una colaboración entre Harvard y MIT. De a poco estos cambios se están viendo también en las escuelas secundarias, y uno solo puede predecir que seguirán creciendo.

Desde el 2004 hasta la fecha, Khan Academy ha recibido más de 6 millones de visitas únicas a sus videos, clases y ejercicios, y estos videos han sido vistos más de 200 millones de veces. Escuelas y alumnos de todo el mundo están utilizando estos contenidos para educarse, entendiendo que ayudan a una formación más a medida de los intereses y ritmos de aprendizaje, permiten volver a la lección aunque sea antes o después del colegio, y contribuyen a una mayor retención de lo aprendido.

La tecnología permite combinar la enseñanza tan personalizada como era la de una institutriz, con la masividad de acceso a la educación que surgió con las nuevas demandas de la revolución industrial. Si bien esta tecnología es sola una herramienta, un instrumento que se puede utilizar mejor o peor, tiene realmente la capacidad de transformar la forma de enseñar y aprender, poniendo al alumno en el centro del sistema educativo y aumentando la calidad de enseñanza para todos.



¿Te pareció interesante este blog?
Mira qué opinan otros y deja tu comentario aquí
]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2051111 2012-11-01T15:39:42-04:00 2013-01-01T05:12:01-05:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/ put together by Formar Foundation aims to answer.

The paper also attempted an analysis of which factors influence Hispanic achievement based on a preliminary statistical analysis of some explanatory variables at the state level in the United States. Perhaps not surprisingly, the research found significant evidence that differences in socio-economic status -- particularly poverty levels -- go a long way in explaining the persistent achievement gap between Hispanic and non-Hispanic students.

Just how serious is this gap? While not perfect, the most common way of measuring comparative educational achievement in the U.S. is through standardized test scores, and specifically the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NEAP), the largest representative, ongoing, and multi-subject assessment. According to the NEAP, while there has been a reduction in the gap -- Hispanic students between the 4th and 8th grades improved their reading scores by, on average, 6.75 points from 2003 to 2011, whereas white students have improved their scores on average only 2.24 points in the same period -- white students still perform better than Hispanic students at all grade levels.

The continuing gap is particularly troubling given that Hispanics are the largest, youngest and fastest growing minority in the United States. The group now includes 50.5 million people, accounting for 16 percent of the total population, and over the last ten years accounted for 56 percent of the nation's growth rate. This means that more than 11 million Hispanic children are currently between the ages of five and 17. In comparison, the white population increased by 14.3 million and accounted for 26 percent of US population growth.

Not that there has been a shortage of attempted reforms. Indeed, over the past two decades, there have been efforts to improve Hispanic student performance both directly, through targeted programs, and indirectly, by seeking system-wide improvements.

Reforms targeted at the particular educational problems of the Hispanic community include programs to improve English language skills, provide scholarships for students, supply mentoring activities, and encourage enrollment in early childhood programs, among others. On the other hand, a greater movement toward performance-based results assessment has sought to raise achievement for all students in the system and thus by default that of Hispanics. This is the case of reforms related to parental choice, performance accountability, and teacher training. By the beginning of the 21st century, the most important instance of the second type of reform was the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act, which also had a primary objective of reducing educational inequality between various sectors of society.

However, the evidence shows that minorities in general, and Hispanics in particular, have not benefitted from these reforms as intended. Beyond a gap in standardized testing, Hispanics continue to struggle in a number of important areas. Hispanic students are less likely to be enrolled in childhood learning and kindergarten programs. Their high school graduation rates only reach 65.9 percent, compared to the national rate of 75.5 percent. They disproportionately attend public schools that are larger, more minority-heavy, and lower quality. Hispanics are underrepresented in the teaching profession as well, a fact which likely contributes to the fact that only 53 percent of Hispanic high school graduates are "minimally qualified" for admission to a four-year undergraduate program.

These dispiriting statistics suggest that factors beyond the education system itself are driving low achievement, and our model attempted to measure the strength of the correlation between academic success and various socio-economic conditions. We found that the most evident correlation in this area was that between the reading test gap and child poverty -- the greater the difference between Hispanic and white children living in poverty, the wider the achievement gap. In fact, an increase of one unit in the percentage of Hispanic children that are poor in comparison with white children in poverty is associated with an increase of 0.87 points in the achievement gap.

Moreover, one point of increase in the dropout rate among Hispanic students from one year to the other is associated with an increase of 1.22 points in the achievement gap. The teacher-to-student ratio is also significant, as a one point increase in the ratio is associated with an increase of 1.12 in the achievement gap.

While this does prove direct causation in itself, and while more analysis is needed, we believe that education reformers too often overlook the influence of these interlocking socio-economic variables on the achievement gap. Poverty levels, lack of language skills and other social issues all seem to conspire to drag down the quality of education among Hispanics. And that means, unfortunately, that education reform polices alone will not, ultimately, be enough to solve the education deficit.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1970862 2012-10-19T10:38:40-04:00 2012-12-19T05:12:01-05:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/

La calidad de los maestros tiene un enorme impacto en el aprendizaje de los niños en edad escolar. Las protestas y manifestaciones ocurridas hace alguna semanas en Chicago, y la exitosa película Won't Back Down, estrenada el 20 de Septiembre en cines en todo Estados Unidos, han vuelto a poner este tema en la discusión pública en Estados Unidos. Es un asunto que también es de vital importancia para América Latina.

Frente a los requerimientos del Alcalde Rahm Emanuel, que entre otras medidas como alargar el año lectivo, buscaba establecer evaluaciones de performance a todos los maestros, el sindicato alegaba que medir únicamente la capacidad de enseñanza era injusto, ya que la pobreza de los estudiantes determinaba su aprendizaje. En el sistema público de Chicago aproximadamente un 87% de los estudiantes provienen de familias de bajos recursos, de acuerdo con el Consortium of Chicago School Research, y 86% son minorías, afro-americanas y latinas.

Pero si bien las condiciones socioeconómicas son un factor determinante en la calidad educativa de un niño y su futuro laboral, y de ahí que combatir la pobreza es un política vital para promover mejores escuelas, innumerables estudios demuestran que el maestro es el factor más importante en el nivel de aprendizaje en el aula.

Uno de los mejores reportes en la materia es el producido por investigadores Raj Chetty, John N. Friedman y Jonah E. Rockoff de las Universidades de Harvard y Colombia, publicado por el National Bureau of Economic Reserach el pasado Diciembre. Su principal conclusión es que aún en un contexto de pobreza y bajos ingresos, los maestros tienen un rol determinante, positivo o negativo, en el aprendizaje.

De acuerdo al estudio, un maestro poco efectivo, del grupo del 1% de peor nivel, tiene un impacto similar a que el estudiante pierda un 40% de su año lectivo. Por el contrario, un maestro dentro del 20% de mayor performance, tiene un impacto como si el alumno atendería uno o dos meses más de clases.

En el estudio también se comprobó que la calidad de maestros no influye solamente en el desenvolvimiento del estudiante en su vida academica, sino tambien profesional y adulta. Por ejemplo, Chetty, Friedman y Rockoff comprobaron que dependiendo de la calidad del maestro, el porcentaje de estudiantes que asisten a la universidad sube mientras que el número de embarazos en adolescencia baja. De igual manera, agregó que cada estudiante tiene un agregado $25,000 a sus "lifetime earnings" si tienen profesores con resultados de calidad media en los examenes de calidad.

De acuerdo, los maestros son fundamentales para una buena enseñanza, ¿pero como se encuentran los buenos y se capacita el resto para que mejoren? Este punto es el que ha generado las mayores tensiones en Chicago, y en los lugares de América Latina donde se ha impulsado la evaluación de los alumnos, y de los maestros para analizar y mejorar su performance.

En Chicago el sindicato se oponía a la evaluación, que demanda el Estado de Illinios, como muchos otros estados en el país, y a su vez, requería que los maestros que eran desplazados de una escuela por no estar enseñando adecuadamente, tuvieran prioridad de ser contratados en otra escuela. ¿Pero alguien que no está ayudando al aprendizaje de los estudiantes en un barrio, se lo prioriza para enseñar en la escuela de al lado? ¿Y porque esos alumnos tendrán que ahora recibir clases de este maestro de peor calidad? Como dice el comentarista del NYT Nicholas Kristof "ese es un insulto para los estudiantes". "Enseñar, continua Kristof, es tan importante que debería ser como en otros profesiones, con altas pagas y buenas condiciones laborales, pero pocas protecciones laborales para los que no tengan buena performance enseñando".

Las evaluación a los maestros deben abarcar todos los factores involucrados en el aprendizaje, y no reducir la complejidad de la enseñanza a exámenes estandarizados. Hay que tener en consideración la performance de los alumnos, la experiencia laboral, los estudios, el contexto escolar, y de la comunidad, la evolución de los resultados escolares a lo largo de un tiempo. Teniendo estos y otros factores en consideración es fundamental conocer la performance de los maestros. Son demasiado importantes para el aprendizaje de los alumnos, para no tenerlo en cuenta.

¿Te pareció interesante este blog?
Mira qué opinan otros y deja tu comentario aquí


TAMBIÉN VE:



ADEMÁS:

]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1932215 2012-10-04T19:15:08-04:00 2012-12-04T05:12:01-05:00

Gabriel Sanchez Zinny http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabriel-sanchez-zinny/ growing faster and representing an ever larger share of world GDP.

This reality is also playing out in the sphere of international development assistance, once almost exclusively the realm of the "first world" economies. As Europe and the US enter an era of austerity budgeting, they are being pushed by both fiscal realities and political pressure at home to cut back on ambitious foreign aid goals. Developing countries are increasingly filling the gap, drawing on their increased capacity for foreign aid spending and their newfound geopolitical heft.

A look at gross global foreign assistance numbers shows that the traditional donors still lead the way - although this doesn't tell the whole story. The most recent Index of Global Philanthropy shows the US far out in front with an Official Development Assistance (ODA) budget of over $30 billion yearly. In comparison, the UK, Germany, France, and Japan, the next largest donors, all contribute between $11 and $13 billion in ODA a year.

But the UK, struggling with its own recession, has announced that it will be cutting its overseas aid by more than $1.5 billion over the next three years. The British government has blamed the cuts on shrinking revenues stemming from a contracting economy. Italy, Ireland, and Spain have each reduced their aid budgets. And in the US, Congress is pushing for the biggest cuts to foreign aid in twenty years, on the back of an overall decrease in international affairs spending to $49 billion in 2011 from its 2010 level of $55 billion.

By contrast, emerging economies are pouring more resources into aid than ever before. In 2006, foreign assistance from emerging donors reached nearly ten percent of total global aid flows; by 2011, some estimates, like those of the Center for Global Development, place that share as high as 30 percent. According to an analysis by the nonprofit Global Health Strategies Initiatives, Brazil and India's foreign aid spending grew by more than 20 percent between 2005 and 2010. Over the same period, China and South Africa's spending increased by ten percent.

These countries are not only changing the landscape in terms of funding levels, but also in terms of the underlying philosophy of aid. Emerging economies have developed the skills to make their money go further, and are able to engage on a peer-to-peer level that superpowers like the US have struggled to. India, for example, succeeded in eradicating polio in 2012 after having one of the highest rates in the world. Now, it is working to translate that local expertise into effective, targeted foreign aid: over the past three years, it has spent $100 million on health-related projects abroad.

And Brazil, perhaps even more so, epitomizes the up and coming emerging donors. Its direct aid budget has topped one billion dollars, and if we count subsidized financing from its state-owned development bank, its foreign aid reaches some four billion dollars yearly. Africa is a particular target for Brazilian aid - the continent receives 55 percent of Brazil's aid disbursements. These funds go towards everything from HIV/AIDS clinics in Mozambique to $150 million for road construction in Nairobi. Nor is this funding totally altruistic; rather, it complements growing trade ties and political relations. In 2011, total trade between Brazil and Africa topped $27 billion, up from $4 billion in 2002.

In Washington, policymakers are beginning to make virtue out of necessity by developing ways of reorienting the US aid budget around these new realities. A new report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) entitled "Strategic Foreign Assistance Transitions" outlines the need for the US to transition away from traditional aid and toward mutually beneficial relationships based on peer-to-peer linkages such as trade, investment, science and technology partnerships, and person-to-person exchanges.

This strategy envisions leaning more heavily on institutions like the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), the Export-Import Bank, and the Development Credit Authority, which support trade and entrepreneurial activities in partner countries. A focus on investment dovetails, as well, with the leading role that private aid plays in the US: the private sector is responsible for $39 billion dollar a year of philanthropy in the developing world, easily outstripping federal expenditures.

These recommendations are about shifting away from old forms of aid while still remaining positively engaged with lower-income countries. As examples like India and Brazil have shown, these kinds of "aid in order to trade" type of relationships are win-win for both sides. And ultimately, the fact that countries once dependent on foreign aid are now donors themselves is a sign of positive global development. The key for countries like the United States, as CSIS argues, is to intelligently manage the transition.]]>