The idea that investing in human capital is central to promoting development has been widely accepted since the 1950s — and the world has seen spectacular progress. Improvements in life expectancy and the expansion of schooling in the developing world have been extraordinary: both have improved more in the past 60 years than the previous 6,000 years of human history…
[the world bank’s] human capital index recognizes that “schooling ain’t learning.” Parents, communities, and countries have always had learning goals for their youth, namely that they acquire the skills and capabilities they will need to be successful adults. However, the international community has often reduced learning goals to goals based on “time served” in a school. In the Millennium Development Goals, for example, the “universal primary completion” goal made no reference to what a child might learn in those years.
This had produced success in schooling, in that nearly every child now has access to and attends school. But, tragically, if you want to find an uneducated child in the world today, the place to find them is in school. Analysis of recent data from surveys of women around the world finds that less than half of adult women who completed only six years of schooling could read a single simple sentence.
While the Sustainable Development Goals reflect both goals for schooling and for learning, the World Bank’s new Human Capital Index (HCI) uses “learning adjusted school years” and is the first international measure to directly incorporate student learning into an overall index.
A new index might seem an uninteresting technical detail for development insiders only, but the policy implications are actually enormous. The new HCI essentially rules out the “more only” strategies that countries often find most comfortable. Since all countries know how to build and equip schools and staff them with teachers, the temptation is to hear “invest in human capital” and think “build more schools so that kids complete more years.”
But with “learning adjusted school years” as the measure of human capital, that doesn’t work. If your children are only learning half as much as children in the leading learning performance countries, then “more only” can produce half the human capital of the higher learning countries. “More only” strategies are just not a viable path to high human capital.
The second new piece is that if “schooling ain’t learning,” then “spending ain’t investment.” “Invest in human capital” does not mean “spend more” in business as usual ways… The HCI doesn’t measure inputs; it measures outputs, and hence spending that doesn’t lead to higher schooling or higher learning doesn’t really count as investment in human capital.Lant Prichett – 2 things the World Bank’s human capital index gets right on education
Yes, it’s so often a hoax. Outcome measurement is crucial, happens so seldomly, is often maligned, and (sadly) often poorly done.