Ponte Academic Journal Oct 2016, Volume 72, Issue 10 |
USO DEL SISTEMA DE MEDICION DE LA CALIDAD DE LA EDUCACION (SIMCE) EN LA LEY SEP (SUBVENCION ESCOLAR PREFERENCIAL): EXISTE UN CONTRASENTIDO ENTRE LOS PROPOSITOS DE CALIDAD Y EQUIDAD? Author(s): Francisco Ganga Contreras ,Jonathan Fernandez-Figueroa, Cristóbal Reyes-Bielefeld J. Ponte - Oct 2016 - Volume 72 - Issue 10 doi: 10.21506/j.ponte.2016.10.15 Abstract: Analyze the issue of education is particularly relevant because of the impact this has the progress and development of countries. In the case of Chile, to attend to the problems emphasize because of the subvention undifferentiated, in 2008 was promoted the preferential school subvention law (SEP): policy that increase the amount of the subvention for students considerate as priority (vulnerable) with the purpose to get two things; on one side encourage the integration of most students in vulnerable conditions, and on the other side, increase the quality of education looking for improve the SIMCE scores (instrument that determine the quality of education in our country) under this policy, the purpose of this study is to show the contradiction between the SEP law at the moment of considering SIMCE as an instrument to assign achievements. In order to do this, we demonstrate an intense and inverse correlation between the vulnerability index (IVE) and the SIMCE scores, is that, as increasing the number of priority students (IVE) the SIMCE would indicate that the scores would tend to decrease, with this the quality of education is damage, which puts in contradiction the purpose of Sep law.
|
Download full text: Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution |
|
Guide for Authors
This guideline has been prepared for the authors to new submissions and after their manuscripts have been accepted |
Authors Login
We welcome refrees who would be willing to act as reviewers |
Paper Tracking
You can track your submitted article from this tab |
Editorial Board
The international editorial board is headed by Dr. Maria E. Boschi |
General Policies
Papers that are published or held by the Journal may not be published elsewhere |
Peer Review Process
Papers will be sent to three peer reviewers for evaluation |