Essay: Obstacles to the supply and demand for education

Education is recognised internationally as a human right. Depriving or excluding anyone from education results in a direct, negative impact on promoting well-being and combatting poverty (Right to Education Initiative, 2018). Benevolent governments would be able to understand that an educated populace is more productive, since education is an input in economic growth and development. Economists are able to improve education levels by manipulating the demand and supply side of school enrolment determinates. The purpose of this paper is to assess whether the eradication of primary school fees is effective in increasing school enrolments. To do so, economists must pinpoint the obstacles to the supply and demand for education, review case studies, and then conclude with a critique. Cuba as a case study in particular will be examined more thoroughly, because its success surpassed that of even developed nations like the UK.
The modern world has almost achieved the universalisation of at least primary education (Mehrotra, 1998) even in developing nations. Having the government provide education as a service is arguably preferable to leaving it to market forces. This could come in forms of either direct investment or supporting communities in building their own institutions. This was the case in Zimbabwe, where communities built schools that were better suited for them. Interestingly, inequalities that appeared in cases where governments directly invested in schools, like in Kenya, did not appear in Zimbabwe. Primary school fees were higher in Kenya than in Zimbabwe and they were less inclined to send girls to school. Despite that, overall, state-funding schools is the popular option.
Put graph of enrolment ratios here and commentate
The enrolment ratio does more than demonstrate number of attendees of both genders, thus the prominence of gender inequality, it also indicates the number of students who were able to pursue education even further.
Enrolment is determined by these factors; private rate of return in investments, liquidity restraints, information decision makers have, and most importantly in this paper –costs, both explicit and opportunity. Budget constraints restricts certain households from being able to send children to schools.
Uganda started a “Universal Primary Education” programme in 1997 (Deininger, 2003), which eradicated the costs of primary schooling, though not including secondary or beyond. The programme worked to decentralise responsibilities. This programme was deemed successful as it increased enrolment rates by almost double, sometimes more, for both girls and boys. It meant that budget constraints are not troubling matters of concern anymore. The programme also aimed to increase the number of girls attending primary schools and reduce the number of young brides to establish gender equality. As a consequence, gender bias against girls studying generally disappeared. In 1992, children in rural areas attended schools at a lower level than urban children. This pattern has not changed in 1999, but both numbers saw increases in attendance, rural children at a larger rate. As for reasons for not attending, “cost of attendance” dropped from 70.7 to 37, “lack of interest” increased from 13.4 to 26.1. This particular reason is troublesome, as it implies the lack of opportunities available discourages families from sending their children to school and contribute to social marginal benefits. Increase in attendance could imply future strain in financing education, but the education expenditure has opened greater economic opportunities. Unfortunately, the increase in attendance in students overwhelmed the number of trained teachers available. In almost all parts of Uganda, the ratio of teachers to students was 1 to 70. This imbalance has negatively impacted the teaching quality. Reassigning public sector investments meant there is a trade-off; a larger number of primary students, yet less of higher education students. However, the benefits of economic growth and gender equality outweigh the costs.
2019-3-4-1551663531