La Argentina, has the particularity of being a country that offers freely up to higher education levels. Basically, through its different levels and agencies, the State can co-finance, together with families, up to 18 years of a citizen's formal education.

However, currently the idea has become popular that educational performance is declining, and that the current state is worrying.

How to corroborate how much truth there is in these types of statements? And if there is a problem, what type of information would need to be available to reverse that trend? 

In this sense, there are a set of evaluation programs on different aspects of the educational performance in which Argentina participates. An emblematic case is the so-called PISA tests, surveyed by the OECD.

In general, these types of studies do not go unnoticed, and generate disparate reactions: either they are fought in their implementation stage, or their results are rejected due to factors that are not directly related to the evaluation, or they are fully accepted... also due to factors not related to the evaluation.

Of course, this description does not imply that the results of this or that study are being validated or invalidated. What is evident is that there does not seem to be achieving a consent between the different actors involved, about how and what information needs to be collected, in order to obtain a diagnosis of the results provided by the educational system. The clarification is valid: it is not the only consensus that is not being achieved in the sector.

Thus, under this general context, the results by province of Operation Learn 2016 were announced. This program has been conceived as a device of national scope, which measures the evaluation of the learning of students at primary and secondary levels. secondary, and serves as a systematization of information about some conditions in which they develop.

On report, which accompanies this note and is free to download (by clicking on the image below), a journey will be made from the general to the particular.

First, an educational panorama in Latin America will be shown, and then we will delve into the design of the evaluation, the results obtained at the national level and, of course, the results obtained in the province of Santa Fe.

On this point, an exhaustive discussion is carried out on the differences between publicly managed schools and privately managed schools. The document closes with a compilation of the different positions that were generated when the evaluation was implemented.

In the following of this note, given that the reading space is smaller, only the results obtained by the students in the city of Rosario will be presented.

If the reader needs to go even deeper into contextual information, or clear up any doubts; You will surely find greater depth and analysis by reading the report.

Rosary of Santa Fe

At both the primary and secondary levels, the province of Santa Fe has obtained a good place in the ranking with respect to the remaining districts.

However, considered in absolute terms, some results are at least disturbing, especially in the area of ​​mathematics at the secondary level.

As can be seen in the table, the city ​​of Rosario It does not show great differences with respect to the entire province; phenomenon that is explained -in part- by being the most populated city in the territory.

Thus, in general terms, only two out of every three students evaluated managed to obtain a satisfactory or advanced performance; with the exception of the area of ​​mathematics at the secondary level, where only one in three evaluated manages to cross this threshold.

The ramifications of this point are not minor, especially when related to the problems of employability or self-employment, in a generalized context of technological change based on knowledge.

It is largely accepted in human capital theory, stating that a greater investment in education generates greater productivity and, consequently, greater income for an individual or society as a whole.

As statistical information has advanced, the relationship between education and future income has relaxed, due to the recognition of other intervening factors, such as the family environment from which the student comes and, in general terms, due to the recognition of different mechanisms. of selection that operate in the educational decisions of families.

This last point is one of the main factors that explain the performance differential between schools in Public Management y private from the province.

For example, at the primary level there are average differences of around ten percentage points in favor of privately managed schools for performance levels below basic, and of 15 percentage points or more for advanced performance levels.

On the other hand, at the secondary level these differences become less marked, with the exception of the area of ​​mathematics.

In city ​​of Rosario, the phenomenon is replicated; but with a peculiarity: the percentage of students who were evaluated in the public school modality is quite similar to the percentage of students in private schools.

Given that the 2016 Learn exam covers all those eligible to be evaluated, the above implies that the city's enrollment is divided into practically equal parts.

The graph shown below shows the performance of the 6th grade students of the primary level in the city of Rosario, according to the type of management of the school where they attend.

In this regard, of an average of 14.125 students, 54,97% attend publicly managed schools and the remaining 45,03% attend privately managed schools.

As can be seen, the differences in performance occur at the extremes, without major variations between types of management at the satisfactory level.

On the other hand, the following graph shows the performance of 5th year students of the Secundary level in the city of Rosario, according to the type of management of the school where they attend.

As can be seen, at this level the differences deepen in all evaluation levels, showing a 15 percentage point difference in performance below the basic level in the area of ​​mathematics.

Another point worth highlighting is that of the average of 8.231 students who took the four exams, 55,67% attend a privately managed school, and the remaining 44,33% attend a public school.

A superficial reading of the data would lead to attributing the entire difference to the different management models. However, such a statement would be a complete mistake.

In the report that accompanies this note, there is an extensive discussion on the different effects that may be playing when explaining these differences.

The strongest hypothesis is that much of this discrepancy is due to socio-economic factors that are present as a prior requirement for students to enter schools, and about which, these results are nothing more than their emergent.

Thus, both graphics reflect the photo of two cities, in which the quality of education serves as a canvas and landscape. For more information, we invite you to read the full report by clicking on the following image.