Contemporaneous experiences in other parts of the world were quite different. Political revolution in China, for example, changed the very nature of education. Although traditional Chinese culture had attached great importance to education as a means of enhancing a person’s worth and career, by the end of the 1950s the Chinese government could no longer provide jobs adequate to meeting the expectations of those who had acquired some formal schooling. Furthermore, the anti-intellectualism inherent in the mass campaign periods of the Great Leap Forward and, especially, the Cultural Revolution diminished the status and quality of education. The damage done to China’s human capital was so great that it took decades to make up the loss.
A shift to rapid and pragmatic economic development occurred in the late 1970s, when China’s educational system increasingly trained individuals in technical skills so that they could fulfill the needs of the advanced, modern sectors of the economy. The overall trend in Chinese education reflected a combination of fewer students and higher scholastic standards, resulting in a steeply hierarchical educational system. At the turn of the 21st century, slightly more than one-third of the total population had completed primary schooling while roughly one-tenth of all Chinese had finished a secondary school education; fewer than 4 percent had earned an advanced degree. By the end of the 20th century, however, higher-education enrollments in China had grown rapidly. The government had permitted the opening of private educational institutions and had begun to decentralize the overall governance of education.
Higher education in China has expanded dramatically from nearly 7 percent of students in tertiary education in 1999 to nearly 22 percent in 2006. In 2007 almost 19 million students were enrolled in universities, and another 5 million were receiving some form of adult higher education at either the bachelor- or the associate-degree levels. In the same year, approximately 16 percent of students receiving higher education were enrolled in private institutions. Forty-eight percent were female. Literacy as a measure of success
Between 1950 and 2000 the worldwide illiteracy rate dropped from approximately 44 percent to 20 percent of the population aged 15 and older. Yet the number of illiterate people, according to UNESCO data, increased from approximately 700 million in 1950 to some 860 million in 2000 due to rapid population growth in less-developed countries with inadequate education coverage. In the early 21st century South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa remained among the regions with the highest illiteracy rates, at about two-fifths. India and China—each with populations exceeding 1 billion and illiteracy rates of approximately two-fifths and one-sixth, respectively—accounted for a majority of the world’s illiterate adults. Even in developed countries, illiteracy rates of less than 2 percent continued to mask sizable populations who could not understand written communications or use various forms of print material in their everyday lives. Global commitments to education and equality of opportunity
Countries increase the social and economic opportunities for their citizens by increasing access to a basic education that includes instruction in math, language skills, science, history, civics, and the arts. The right of individuals to an educational program that respects their personality, talents, abilities, and cultural heritage has been upheld in various international agreements, including the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights; the 1959 Declaration of the Rights of the Child; and the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Other international declarations further promote the rights of adults and special groups—including disabled individuals as well as ethnic minorities, indigenous and tribal peoples, refugees, and immigrants—to an appropriate education. UNESCO became a driving force toward the goal of universal education, especially through its sponsorship of the World Conference on Education for All (held in Jomtien, Thailand, in 1990), which established 2000 as the target date for universal primary education. In UNESCO’s follow-up World Education Forum (held in Dakar, Senegal, in 2000), that goal was postponed until 2015—a realistic reflection of the difficulties of both enrolling and retaining students through a complete primary education. The target date of 2015 also became one of eight United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDG) drafted in 2000. Steps toward the achievement of universal education and other MDGs were to be tracked by specific indicators, such as literacy rates and enrollment ratios. Access to education
Despite these international conferences, treaties, and goals, by the end of the 20th century more than 120 million primary-school-age children worldwide remained outside formal education systems. Depending on the country, and especially its level of economic development and its political system, the number of children not attending school ranged from fewer than 5 percent to well over 30 percent of the relevant age group. Moreover, it is important to note that high aggregate enrollment rates for any one region or country do not reveal how many children successfully complete the legally required years of schooling. In developing countries repetition of grade levels and dropout rates take their toll, with frequently less than half of a student cohort completing primary schooling. The initial experience of many children is often one of failure. The problem may be as general as the enrollment of children who have never been exposed to formal schooling and who simply do not understand what is occurring in the classroom. Most frequently, the problem is inappropriate curricula and foreign languages of instruction. Even though the drive to extend schooling to greater numbers of students is a universal phenomenon that does not necessarily represent a Western agenda, Western content and languages of instruction are nonetheless employed in countries whose citizens would prefer their education systems to reflect their own cultures and national goals.
For those who complete the initial stages of schooling, examinations commonly serve as a filtering device for determining who shall go on to postprimary education. As countries develop economically, compulsory schooling is extended, and selective examinations are consequently instituted for entry into upper secondary and higher education (as, for example, in South Korea and Japan). Countries with greater wealth tend both to expand education to a greater number of students and to extend the number of years of compulsory schooling. But even expansive systems eventually introduce selection devices for the most advanced and prestigious levels and types of education.
Central questions concerning the role of education in reproducing social status or opening up opportunity to everyone revolve around who has access to what levels and types of education; what is learned; and how the postschool outcomes of education affect occupational attainment, income, social status, and even power. A predominant theme in discussions of education in the late 20th and early 21st centuries was that of equality of educational opportunity (EEO). Some analyses of EEO liken opportunity to a footrace by asking the following three questions: (1) are the contestants equally prepared at the starting line?; (2) are they running on the same course?; and (3) do they all have a fair chance of crossing the finish line? EEO does not necessarily mean, however, that the educational outcomes will be the same for every student. Implications for socioeconomic status
In the West a commonly used measure of social class is an index of socioeconomic status (SES), which usually takes into account the occupational status, income, and education levels of children’s families. To determine whether education systems are truly meritocratic in their workings and outcomes, several hypotheses need to be tested using the SES index. In The Limits and Possibilities of Schooling (1993), the American sociologist Christopher Hurn proposed one method of evaluating education systems over time. Hurn identified the following set of relationships between variables: first, the correlation between adults’ educational attainment (years of schooling and degrees completed) and socioeconomic status should grow stronger over time; second, the correlation between parents’ SES and the educational attainment of their children should diminish over time; and, third, the correlation between the SES of parents and that of their offspring should also decrease over time.