The current state of Mexico’s education system is dismal. The different levels of education are not properly developed, discouraging students from pursuing higher education. Labor market analyst Raja Betaouet Kattan claims that the upper secondary education system is deficient, with only 37.5 percent of 25- to 29-year-olds holding an advanced degree (Kattan). In addition, standardized test scores are among the lowest for Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries (Santiago, et. al). These issues are the result of poor teacher quality. Mexico has not instituted a formal system in which teachers are evaluated. Thus, underqualified teachers are left in the system and a cycle of stagnant teaching ensues. Also, the government and schools do not provide teachers with clear career direction. Economist Yevgeny N. Kuznetsov and global development researcher Carl J. Dahlman claim that promotion is difficult, and teachers are not motivated to perform adequately (Kuznetsov and Dahlman 64). Additionally, the education system is not geared towards equality for students of all geographical and socioeconomic backgrounds. Although Mexico’s government has previously instituted reforms to improve education and teacher quality, these provisions have failed. Consequently, the education system is in need of rehabilitation regarding teacher evaluation, quality of classroom environment, and upper secondary learning.
In Mexico, the the federal government and Mexico’s 33 individual state departments direct the education system. The federal government primarily uses the offices of the Secretary of Public Education (SEP) to do so. Typically, higher education institutions include public and private universities. However, the SEP does not control these bodies. Still, according to knowledge analysts Jessica Magaziner and Carlos Monroy, the SEP sets criteria and goals for education and monitors classes and subjects taught. State education departments determine curricular requirements. Education in Mexico consists of “Basic Education” and “Higher Education” (Magaziner and Monroy). In the past 20 to 30 years, enrollment and reform have increased. One year of free preschool education and twelves years of “elementary and secondary study” is now required. Enrollment in higher education rose from 290,000 in 1971 to 3.6 million in 2016. This increase is a reflection of massive economic and population growth. According to a report by the OECD, by 2016, the total number of students enrolled in any educational institution was 36.3 million, around 30% of the population (OECD). While this increase in enrollment initially appears positive, it has led to debilitating pressure on the system. Educational authorities now must manage how to guarantee access for all students but also ensure quality of education. This rise in enrollment has led to the prevalence of unqualified teachers and a weak upper secondary education system. Consequently, the OECD has reported that the Mexican government has sought reform in education, but these reforms are not enforced or not widespread enough to impact the system (Santiago, et. al)
The most influential problem is the poor qualifications and abilities teachers possess. Basic education in Mexico means that children attend school in the morning or in the afternoon. Teachers and students change in the two shifts, and teachers may teach at different schools in the morning and afternoon. As a result, teachers have limited time and opportunity to plan lessons or engage in “teamwork and mutual learning with other teachers” (OECD). In the Teaching and Learning International Survey conducted by the OECD, the principal of 70% of lower secondary education teachers claim that their absences, lateness, and unpreparedness lower the quality of education. This statistic contrasts to that of only 25% at most other countries participating in the survey (OECD). In addition, there is not a clear-cut career structure for teachers. Hence, teachers do not have a distinct vision for the future of their students or of themselves. Pupil to teacher ratios are poor. Consequently, Kuznetsov and Dahlman agree that students do not receive the attention needed from teachers and advisors to succeed (Kuznetsov and Dahlman 46). Also, the promotion system, dubbed the Vertical Promotion System, is skewed—workers must apply for promotions that are scarcely granted. Thus, teachers are left in the same posts and do not have incentives for performing adequately in their jobs (Santiago, et. al).
Currently, there is no mandatory process of government teacher appraisal. Appraisal is only undertaken on a voluntary basis when teachers desire to pursue a promotion, raise, or monetary bonus. As a result, unqualified teachers are left responsible for educating Mexico’s youth. According to the OECD report “Mexico: 2012,” unqualified teachers is a result of a lack of established teaching standards and that teacher review is not focused on improving teacher quality. The disconnected system for teacher appraisal leads to inconsistency in “offering the same opportunities for all teachers” (Santiago, et. al). Also, evaluating a teacher is largely based on standardized exams. On a voluntary basis, faculty can take the National Examinations for the Continuous Training of In-Service Teachers. However, this examination explores social issues that may arise in the classroom rather than actual knowledge and teaching capability (Santiago, et. al). Teaching is an engaging profession and a written test is not effective in analyzing a teacher’s success. Because of a twisted appraisal and examination system, teachers’ salaries are not aligned with true teaching ability (OECD). Pre-primary through lower secondary education teachers are paid below the OECD average while upper secondary education teachers are paid above this average (“Mexico – Overview”). Teacher reform is needed to advance a sophisticated education system.
In light of the system’s flaw, the Mexican government has attempted to institute reform to improve teacher quality. Still, some of these reforms have failed. The Mexican government is working on creating a mandatory appraisal system for teachers called the Universal Evaluation System. However, this system is only intended to be “purely formative and diagnostic.” It will likely not significantly winnow through all teachers (Santiago, et. al). Teacher portfolios, which provide proof of a teacher’s work during their education at teacher training school, will be introduced to obtain a well-rounded perspective of teachers’ performance. The government began a pilot program in 2011 for teacher portfolios but it was only upon a voluntary basis. In 2008, Mexico established a National Post Teaching Competition as part of the Alliance for Quality in Education. This examination is meant to improve the teaching workforce quality. To take the exam, educators must hold a higher education degree. Prior to the introduction of this examination, “the mechanisms for the selection of teachers were not transparent and sometimes perceived as unequal, corrupt or highly politicised” (Santiago, et. al). Yet, the flaw with this system is that inadequate teachers are given teaching posts in Mexican states where the number of teacher applicants is low (Santiago, et. al). Thus, this system further encourages the cycle of employing poor teachers in Mexico. The same state will continue to receive subpar teachers. In addition, the National Examinations for the Continuous Training of In-Service Teachers is voluntary, meaning that not all teachers are appropriately evaluated. As a result, poor teachers are left in the system. Hence, a rejuvenated teaching workforce will ultimately, according to economists Kuznetsov and Dahlman, “form a cycle of lifelong learning” (Kuznetsov and Dahlman 67).
As a result of inadequate teaching faculty, the upper secondary education system is underdeveloped and its dropout rate is high. Kattan recognizes that “one of the biggest roadblocks faced by [Mexico] to accelerate educational improvement is found at the upper secondary level” (Kattan). Coverage rates are low, and many students cannot afford to attend an upper educational institution. This “lagging educational attainment” has hindered the development of a skilled workforce and dynamic economy (Kattan). The current graduation rate of an upper secondary education is 47%. This statistic compares with 87% for other OECD countries. The completion rate for students in Mexico is 10.5% lower than that for students in all of Central America (OECD). Camryn Ragland volunteered with youth in Mexico the summer of 2016 and faced this issue head on. She noticed that schooling becomes unimportant once parents need older children’s aid with watching younger siblings, completing housework, or supplementing family income with jobs of their own. Ragland claims that “children would leave school early or miss entirely. While it is discouraging to see this, it is a selfless act of these young people to sacrifice education for the sake of their siblings and parents” (Ragland). This dropout situation is pertinent because the required age for upper secondary education in Mexico is 15 to 18 years old. These years, according to Kattan, are “a critical time in the life cycle for an individual's development” (Kattan). Compared to other developed nations, Mexico has a low rate of students expected to receive bachelor’s degrees at only 23% (“Mexico – Overview”). Thus, a disinterest in completing an advanced degree catalyzes an inadequate education system.
The underdeveloped upper education system is a result of dropout rates, poor attendance, and low scores on standardized testing. Consequently, according to labor market analyst Kattan, the “productivity of human resources” (Kattan) is negatively affected. In comparison to Ireland and the Republican of Korea, Kuznetsov and Dahlman noticed that Mexico’s scores for literacy rate, students per teacher, and secondary school enrollment, are poor (Kuznetsov and Dahlman 59). Mexico was contrasted with these two nations because they are countries that transformed into knowledge-based economies in the wake of financial hardship. Mexican students’ disinterest in learning and poor performance is possibly the result of multiple economic declines and the need for youth to enter the workforce. The education system is not practical and equal for all students and should “focus on meeting the learners’ needs” (Kuznetsov and Dahlman 65). Also, the percentage of top-performing Mexican students in science, mathematics, and reading were among the lowest in Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) participating countries. Yet, the OECD indicates that 40.6% of 15-year-olds plan on pursuing career in science (“Mexico – Student Performance”). This statistic indicates that students want to be high achievers but do not have the means to do so. Additionally, Kuznetsov and Dahlman state the average number of years of schooling in Mexico has increased from 4.77 in 1980 to 7.23 in 2000 (Kuznetsov and Dahlman 64). The government also made 12 years of education mandatory for all students. Still, according to Jessica Magaziner and Carlos Monroy, this plan will not go into full effect until 2020 (Magaziner and Monroy). These facts indicate that education quality is increasing, but the government needs to mitigate key issues that hinder progress. Consequently, teacher quality and poor development of upper education are the crucial problems that negatively affect education in Mexico.
Despite it challenges, the Mexican education system has opportunities to improve. While the government has taken certain measures to advance, schools and teachers must now implement these procedures. To fix the problem of short school days, the OECD suggests that the government should promote a national operation of full-length school days. In the mandatory level of education, extensive reform is developing. However, reform is absent in upper secondary education. The government has committed to create a national teaching service that includes a “national competition for teaching posts” and effective teacher training. Since Mexico is a low performing country regarding standardized testing, the OECD suggests making low performance a high priority in reform. Often, low performance is the result of skipping school, not completing homework, absent teachers, and low quality resources. To mitigate these issues, students should receive educational guidance at a young age and parents should be involved in their child’s education. Schools should also identify low performs and create specialized programs for these students (OECD). Dahlman and Kuznetsov suggest that helping young adults reach upper-level education despite economic downturns and encouraging female enrollment will bolster basic and secondary education. They also believe that “match[ing] coursework to labor market demands” will improve the economy (Kuznetsov and Dahlman 69). The government and schools must recognize that improvement is possible and should use the resources necessary to do so.
Thus, Mexico is in need of education reform. Its upper secondary education system is subpar compared to other countries. As a result, a large percentage of older students drop out of school, leading to an under-qualified workforce. Teachers in Mexico do not possess proper qualifications and are not appropriately evaluated. Hence, children do not have the mentors they need to succeed. Students in Mexico do not perform well on standardized testing and do not have strong incentives to stay in school. While the Mexican government has taken measures to address these issues, the standards it put in place are not effective or are not feasible. Kuznetsov and Dahlman suggest that to mitigate these problems, Mexico should “streamline the system of educational facilities” and provide equal access of education to children of all genders, socioeconomic status, and location (Kuznetsov and Dahlman 66). In addition, Mexico can reform the process of teacher review and training to guarantee that qualified teachers are preparing students for their futures in a workforce that demands skills (OECD). Clearly, Mexico has opportunities to advance its education system. The current system of education of Mexico is suffering, but improvement is attainable because of the efforts educators, students, and government officials alike can direct towards this problem.