Connecting Learners: Narrowing the Educational Divide the Benefits From, and Barriers To, Improved School Connectivity and Access to Digital Learning

Connecting learners: Narrowing the educational divide The benefits from, and barriers to, improved school connectivity and access to digital learning

SPONSORED BY IN SUPPORT OF Connecting learners 2 Narrowing the educational divide

Foreword

The path of human progress is marked by milestones created when a relevant technology arrives at the right time to meet or drive forward a compelling collective need – just think about Johannes Gutenberg and the printing press, Grace Hopper and computer programming, and Tim Berners-Lee and the World Wide Web.

We have now reached another of these technology milestones, with digital connectivity increasingly underpinning global society. While education has for decades been greatly challenged by the digital divide, the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the digital transformation, creating opportunity from deep adversity. With schools closed, millions of families around the globe transitioned overnight to remote learning. Digital experiences, enabled by connectivity and quality content, have become vital for students and teachers to continue the pursuit of knowledge.

While disruptive, this watershed has allowed a glimpse of what is possible when technology is used in innovative ways to provide learning opportunities for children and young people, wherever they are.

But much work remains for a vision of universal digital connectivity and learning to be realised. This report by The Economist Intelligence Unit underscores the importance of accelerating gains in infrastructure and education in tandem. It quantifies how connecting schools is key to improved learning outcomes and more prosperous economies, finding that a 10% increase in school connectivity can increase the effective years of schooling for children by 0.6%, and GDP per capita by 1.1%.

It also reveals that, in addition to the need to improve infrastructure, teachers and students must have the support and tools required to fully realise the new possibilities that school connectivity brings to learning. This is true in both developing and developed countries, and in both urban and rural areas. The digital divide is a challenge for all societies. Moreover, the benefits of such investments are not limited to schoolchildren: connected schools serve as community focal points for broader learning and development, as well as enhancing the quality of digital literacy among community members.

Collaboration across sectors, such as UNICEF’s partnership with Ericsson, is key to accelerating and sustaining change. We are proud to be working together to support the global Giga initiative, which was launched in 2019 by UNICEF and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Its aim is to connect every school worldwide to the internet by 2030. Ericsson’s resources and expertise are accelerating the collection, analysis and visualisation of data in real time, supporting UNICEF in mapping school connectivity in 35 countries by the end of 2023. This will be a fundamental step toward Giga’s ambitious goal of connecting every school around the globe within a decade.

The strengthening of universal connectivity is a critical step towards providing access to digital learning. But our efforts cannot stop there. That is why UNICEF has launched the Reimagine Education initiative, with the aim of providing every child and young person access to world-class digital learning to help them develop the skills needed to leapfrog to a brighter future. With its focus on school connectivity, the Giga initiative serves as one of the key pillars of Reimagine Education. Through further partnership and collaboration, Reimagine Education builds on improved connectivity, affordability of data, access to devices, and engagement with young people to apply this transformative vision in the way we deliver education.

We have a responsibility to accelerate digital inclusion and build a sustainable future for generations of students to come. We encourage governments, public institutions, industry and thought leaders to join us in true public–private partnership. This will provide the leadership required to achieve quality digital learning, meaningful connectivity, and access to opportunity for every child.

Börje Ekholm Henrietta Fore CEO, Ericsson UNICEF Executive Director

Contents

Foreword 2

About this report 5

Executive Summary 8

1. Introduction 10

2. A shift in focus: from education quantity to education quality 11

3. Connecting schools, bridging gaps 23

4. Beyond the individual: The socioeconomic impacts of school 32 connectivity and access to digital learning

5. What’s to gain from connecting schools? 40

6. So, where do we go from here? 52

Appendix A: Country profiles 67

Brazil 67

El Salvador 70

Kyrgyzstan 72

Niger 74

Sierra Leone 76

United States 78

Appendix B: Methodology note 80

About this report

Connecting learners: Narrowing the educational divide is an Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) report commissioned by Ericsson. The findings are based on a literature review, expert interviews and econometric modelling conducted by The EIU between January and April 2021. A more detailed description of our methodology is provided in Appendix B. The EIU bears sole responsibility for the content of this report. The findings and views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsor.

We would like to extend our gratitude to Ericsson and UNICEF for their invaluable advice and guidance throughout the project. The report has been produced by a team of researchers, writers and editors, including:

Jonathan Birdwell – Senior project director For any enquiries about the report Jeremy Kingsley – Project director please contact: Shivangi Jain – Project manager and Shivangi Jain lead economist The Economist Intelligence Unit Mrigansh Jain – Economist E: [email protected] Anand Kashyap – Researcher

Interviewees Our thanks are due to the following people for their time and insights:

Alejandro Ganimian Macke Raymond New York University, Assistant Professor Stanford University, Director of the Center for of Applied Psychology and Economics Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) Alex Wong Mario Franco International Telecommunication Union (ITU), Millenium@EDU SUSTAINABLE Chief, Special Initiatives, and ITU Giga Co-Lead EDUCATION, Chairperson Borhene Chakroun Michael Trucano UNESCO, Director, Division for Policies World Bank, Senior Education & and Lifelong Learning Systems Technology Policy Specialist and Global Christopher Yoo Lead for Innovation in Education University of Pennsylvania, John H. Chestnut Miguel Brechner Professor of Law, Communication, and Plan Ceibal Uruguay, Founder Computer and Information Science and and former President Director of the Center for Technology, Radhika Iyengar Innovation and Competition Columbia University, The Earth Eric Kimenyi Institute, Education Sector Director African Institute of Mathematical Sciences Tim Unwin (AIMS), Programme Manager, Teacher UNESCO Chair in ICT4D and Royal Training Programme (TTP) Rwanda Holloway, University of London, Jane Coffin Emeritus Professor of Geography Internet Society, Senior Vice President for Internet Growth

About The Economist Intelligence Unit

The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) is the research arm of The Economist Group, publisher of The Economist. As the world’s leading provider of country intelligence, it helps governments, institutions and businesses by providing timely, reliable and impartial analysis of economic and development strategies. Through its public policy practice, The EIU provides evidence-based research for policymakers and stakeholders seeking measurable outcomes, in fields ranging from gender and finance to energy and technology. It conducts research through interviews, regulatory analysis, quantitative modelling and forecasting, and displays the results via interactive data visualisation tools. Through a global network of more than 650 analysts and contributors, The EIU continuously assesses and forecasts political, economic and business conditions in more than 200 countries. For more information, visit www.eiu.com.

About Ericsson

Ericsson provides high-performing solutions to enable its customers to capture the full value of connectivity. The Company supplies communication infrastructure, services and software to the telecom industry and other sectors. Ericsson has approximately 100,000 employees and serves customers in more than 180 countries. Ericsson is listed on Nasdaq Stockholm and the Ericsson ADS trade on Nasdaq New York. The Company’s headquarters are located in Stockholm, Sweden.

Ericsson is sponsoring this report in support of the Company's global partnership with UNICEF, which is contributing to mapping school connectivity in 35 countries.

About UNICEF

UNICEF promotes the rights and wellbeing of every child, in everything we do. Together with our partners, we work in 190 countries and territories to translate that commitment into practical action, focusing special effort on reaching the most vulnerable and excluded children, to the benefit of all children, everywhere.

For more information about UNICEF and its work for children, visit www.unicef.org.

Follow UNICEF on Twitter and LinkedIn.

UNICEF does not endorse any company, brand, product or service.

Why school connectivity?

Even in the most remote, hard-to-reach areas, there are schools around which entire communities gather, not only for learning, but also for community-wide access to health and emergency services. However, nobody knows how many schools there are in the world, or where they all are. This information gap means that we cannot identify where to deploy resources—including the digital resources so necessary in an increasingly digital world.

Launched by UNICEF and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in 2019, Giga1 is a global initiative to connect every school to the internet, and every young person to information, opportunity, and choice. Schools, for Giga, are not only a place for learning and connecting, but also a focal point, a countable unit, to craft business cases to connect unconnected schools and communities. Giga starts by mapping the location and real-time connectivity status of every school in the world, to identify connectivity gaps and assess demand. With this data, it works with industry and governments to identify best possible connectivity solutions and build sustainable models for finance and service delivery— so that every young person and their entire surrounding community can access digital solutions and meaningfully participate in and contribute to their own empowered future.

Reimagine Education

Under the leadership of UNICEF, with Generation Unlimited and Giga, the Reimagine Education initiative seeks to radically scale up digital learning solutions. It aims to enable every child and young person—some 3.5 billion by 2030—to access world-class digital learning solutions which can build the skills they need to leapfrog to a brighter future. The initiative operates through five key interconnected components:

• World-class digital learning solutions: Personalised learning which provides every child and young person with a modern education that: is child-centred, self-paced, individualised, relevant to the child’s context and language-appropriate; is skills- based (foundational, transferable, digital, entrepreneurial and job-specific); promotes universality by reaching all children and young people including the most marginalised; and employs appropriate technology including digital, low/no tech, and hybrid solutions.

• Connectivity: Connecting every school, child and young person to the internet and to choice and opportunity;

• Affordability of data and content: Making digital learning more affordable to enable access by every child and young person;

• Access to devices: Providing devices for children and teachers/facilitators so that marginalised children and young people can access the best available digital learning solutions; and

• Young people’s engagement: Young people and volunteers as co-creators of solutions and who can offer support with advocacy, accountability, and scale.

1 https://gigaconnect.org/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 8 Narrowing the educational divide

Executive summary

In the last few decades, amid the widespread both the educational divide and the digital adoption of digital devices including laptops divide. Schools are not only places where and mobile phones, the promise held by children learn, but are also often community digital connectivity for school-age children hubs—places where people vote, where public has become increasingly evident. By providing resources (like vaccines) are administered, and access to a wealth of resources and enabling where people shelter during natural disasters, new forms of learning, such as through among other uses. Providing connectivity to a adaptive learning platforms, access to the school is a way to empower children with access internet and digital learning has played an to world-class digital content, but it is also a important role in enhancing the quality means to enable local entrepreneurship, provide of education globally. Improved learning access to online banking, improve information outcomes proliferate through adolescence channels during emergencies or pandemics, and adulthood, leading to a wider range of and open doors for employment through digital higher education and career opportunities. platforms and the gig economy. It is through Ultimately, these benefits to individuals are this lens that school connectivity becomes an reflected in terms of higher incomes, better important focus for achieving broader social and health and improved overall well-being. economic goals in communities on a global scale.

But the benefits from school connectivity and School connectivity and access to digital digital learning don’t stop at the individual. learning benefit individuals and society. But the Improvements in the quality of education paths to deriving these benefits are complex. have been consistently demonstrated to drive To better understand these channels through economic growth through spillover effects: a which school connectivity can impact on well-educated workforce is more likely to be learning and socioeconomic outcomes, The innovative and foster groundbreaking ideas, EIU constructed an economic model. Our leading to economic development and job analysis found that increasing levels of school creation. To the extent that school connectivity connectivity can improve both—quantitatively, can enhance the quality of education—when a 10% increase in school connectivity2 can supplemented by other measures which increase the effective years of schooling for enable the effective use of the connectivity, children by 0.6%, and GDP per capita by 1.1%. such as access to devices, the availability In Niger, for example, this could mean that of relevant content, and the provision of matching school connectivity levels to Rwanda— support and tools to teachers and students with the highest school connectivity level among to effectively integrate technology into developing countries—and Finland—with the educational practice—the same effects hold. highest school connectivity level globally— Beyond the long-run economic gains derived could increase effective years of schooling3 through education improvements, school by over 10% from 2.7 years. We calculate that connectivity also enables community this could boost Niger’s GDP per capita by development, thereby generating additional up to 20% by 2025 (from projected GDP per impacts. Connecting schools can serve to close capita of US$550 in 2025 to up to $660).

2 Measured using the World Economic Forum’s ‘Internet Access in School index 3 Measured using the World Bank’s learning-adjusted years of schooling indicator which provides a measure of educational quality by adjusting the average of schooling attained by the learning outcomes achieved.

In developed countries, on the other hand, So, what needs to happen next? This the challenge is less in terms of access to report, based on the input and insights connectivity in schools, and more in terms of of experts, identifies four priorities: the quality of this connectivity. In the United States, for example, while 99% of schools are 1. Collaboration is key. A holistic strategy— connected to fibre infrastructure to access the with cross-government and private sector internet, the speed of internet connection varies collaboration—is needed to coordinate substantially across states. We find that simply efforts across stakeholders to overcome improving the bandwidth per student across barriers to school connectivity and access states could increase national GDP by between to digital learning tools, and to enable their 0.4% and 5.5%. A further major challenge with effective integration with education systems. regard to connectivity in the United States 2. Accessibility and affordability. Building is the so-called “homework gap”—the lack of infrastructure to enable access to the connectivity available to students outside of internet is the starting point for beginning schools, which leads to a divergence in the to realise the benefits it can offer. But performance on homework and subsequent having the option to access the internet educational performance between students is different to being able to access it in a with and without access. Addressing this meaningful way—poor quality and high cost challenge could stimulate even further, can act as roadblocks. Working together, potentially more significant, economic gains. governments, businesses and telecom While there are substantial potential gains on providers should aim to continually improve offer from increasing school connectivity— the quality and affordability of connectivity. both for individuals and wider society— 3. Embedding the use of the internet making these a reality is easier said than done. and digital tools in education. Once First, despite the benefits it can offer, school affordable access to school connectivity connectivity levels remain low in many parts and digital learning has been achieved, of the world. This is driven by a number of it must be effectively integrated into factors on both the supply and demand sides, curricula. This requires a change in the including investment barriers to building approach to delivering education. It infrastructure to connect hard-to-reach areas, also requires that teachers are trained to as well as challenges in the affordability of deliver through these new approaches, connectivity for segments of the population. and that they have the tools to do so.

Furthermore, obtaining access to the internet 4. Protecting children online. While the alone does not guarantee that students expansion of school connectivity and and teachers will be able to translate access to digital learning come with this into academic benefits, or that these numerous learning opportunities for benefits will subsequently generate wider children, they can also open up the door socioeconomic benefits. School connectivity to child abuse and exploitation. These is a necessary precondition, but is only one significant risks associated with the piece of the puzzle for achieving the gains. expansion of internet access can often create resistance to its use in education from parents and teachers. Managing these significant risks to enable the safe and secure use of the internet will be important in leveraging the benefits it can offer.

1. Introduction

The link between education and socioeconomic In this report, we explore the role of the development is well-evidenced. As a result, internet and digital tools in education, the education policy is a priority for most benefits that expansion of school connectivity governments, and policymakers often have can bring to individuals and to societies, two broad levers at their disposal: increasing and the challenges not only in terms of the quantity of education, and improving its increasing access but also in managing any quality. While there still remains a gap between negative consequences of this. The report the quantity of education across countries is based on expert interviews, an extensive (measured by average years of schooling), it literature review and bespoke economic is rapidly closing and will reach a natural limit. analysis to assess the potential gains from, Improvement in the quality of education, and challenges to, improved school internet however, is boundless, and holds greater connectivity and access to digital learning. scope for the influence of policymakers. • In section 2, we discuss the internet Improving internet connectivity and access in the context of education to digital learning in schools is becoming • In section 3, we explore the benefits to increasingly essential in the context of education, students from having access to the internet both from a quantity and quality perspective. When it is affordable and accessible, with the • In section 4, we identify the wider relevant content, it not only enables more socioeconomic spillover effects children to access education without placing from school internet connectivity additional burden on teachers or driving and access to digital learning down quality by increasing classroom sizes, it also has significant quality implications • In section 5, we quantify the potential by expanding access to a wide range of economic gains from expanding school educational resources, connecting students connectivity in selected countries to the best educational content and the best • In section 6, we discuss how policymakers, teachers around the world at the click of a educational institutions and telecoms button. In the context of COVID-19, access providers can work together to to the internet for schoolchildren has allowed facilitate, leverage and manage many to continue to learn despite school better internet connectivity and the closures. At the same time, the pandemic has use of digital tools in education highlighted the challenges posed by a lack of connectivity. If anything, it has acted as an accelerator for the integration of the internet within education and can pave the way for reimagining education systems across the world.

2. A shift in focus: From education quantity to education quality

Education: A driver of While increased years of schooling can economic growth result in higher labour market returns, the magnitude of the returns depends also on There is no denying the powerful link the interplay between demand and supply between education and economic growth. forces in the labour market. If the demand Education is associated with a wide range for educated labour is low relative to supply, of benefits, not only to individuals receiving then the returns to education will similarly education but also to society at large. be low. In urban China, for example, the returns to education rose from 4% for each At the individual level, numerous studies additional year of schooling in 1988 to 10% in have sought to explore what is known as 2001. Most of this increase was attributable the “private return” to education.4 A more to institutional reforms that increased the educated individual is rewarded in the labour demand for skilled labour.9 These findings market for their greater productivity—their highlight the intricate link between education prize is a higher wage. According to an OECD and economic performance, and vice versa. report, The Economic Impacts of Learning Losses,5 data shows that each additional The private returns to education go beyond level of educational attainment is associated the financial benefits from increased labour with improved labour market outcomes market earnings. Studies have, for example, for individuals. The report observes that shown a link between maternal education individuals with higher levels of education and child health through the knowledge are more likely to find employment, remain acquired by mothers—each additional year employed, learn new skills on the job and of female primary schooling is estimated earn more over their working life relative to to be associated with approximately those with lower levels of education. The six fewer deaths per 1,000 live births.10 Mincer equation, quantifies this relationship Higher income levels can also allow for an between years of schooling and subsequent overall improvement in quality of life. earnings6—analysis suggests that every additional year of schooling can increase the earnings potential of an individual by 5–8%.7,8

4 Canals, C. (2017), “Education and economic growth”. https://www.caixabankresearch.com/en/economics-markets/labour-market-demographics/ education-and-economic-growth#:~:text=Education%20directly%20affects%20economic%20growth,as%20well%20as%20their%20quality. 5 Hanushek, E. and Woessmann, L. (2020), “The Economic Impacts of Learning Losses”, OECD. https://www.oecd.org/education/The-economic- impacts-of-coronavirus-covid-19-learning-losses.pdf 6 Mincer, J. (1974), “Schooling, experience and earnings”, NBER. https://www.nber.org/books-and-chapters/schooling-experience-and-earnings 7 Patrinos, H. (2016), “Estimating the return to schooling using the Mincer equation”, IZA World of Labour 2016:278. https://wol.iza.org/uploads/articles/278/pdfs/estimating-return-to-schooling-using-mincer-equation.pdf 8 Card, D. (1999), “The causal effect of education on earnings”, Handbook of Labor Economics, Volume 3. https://eml.berkeley.edu/~card/papers/causal_educ_earnings.pdf 9 Zhang, J. et al (2005), “Economic returns to schooling in urban China, 1988 to 2001”, Journal of Comparative Economics 33 (2005) 730-752. http://www.agrod.com/frontier/references/Zhang.2005.EconomicReturns.JournalOfComparativeEconomics.Vol33.p730.pdf 10 Angrist, N. et al (2018), “Learning-Adjusted Years of Schooling (LAYS)”, World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper 8591. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/243261538075151093/pdf/WPS8591.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 12 Narrowing the educational divide

But the benefits of education don’t stop education and the contribution it can make to at the individual—there are also spillover achieving the UN’s Sustainable Development effects. A more educated youth population Goals such as reducing hunger and poverty leads to a more educated, skilled and levels, achieving greater gender equality, productive workforce which is more capable and enabling a transition to clean energy.14 of innovation and fostering groundbreaking ideas. This contributes to more economic Economic theory suggests that individuals development and facilitates a virtuous cycle discount these wider societal benefits of of: more income, more spending, more education, resulting in “under-consumption”, jobs, more economic development, and or less education than would be socially back to more income. Aghion et al. (2009) optimal.15 Hence, education policy forms show this relationship in the context of the an important component of public policy United States,11 while others have provided and accounts for a significant share of cross-country evidence.12 A 2012 study by government expenditure across the world UNESCO found that for every US$1 invested in order to expand access to education and in education, US$10–15 can be generated as a reap its economic benefits—globally, public return to the investment in economic growth.13 sector expenditure on education accounted A more recent 2018 programme conducted for 4.5% of total GDP in 2017, reaching by the FT with Credit Suisse illustrated the over 5% on average in OECD countries various multiplier effects of investment in and over 7% in the Nordic countries.16

The virtuous cycle of education The virtuouscontribution cycle ofof education education to sustainable economic development The contribution of education to sustainable economic development

Increased individual Increased consumer incomes spending

Increased education Increased economic Increased development number of jobs

Source: EIU research

11 Aghion, P. et al (2009), “The causal impact of education on economic growth: Evidence from U.S.”. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/aghion/files/causal_impact_of_education.pdf 12 Romer, P. (1989), “Human capital and growth: Theory and evidence”, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 3173. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w3173/w3173.pdf 13 UNESCO (2012), “Youth and skills: Putting education to work”. Global Education Monitoring Report Team. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000218003 14 “Education: The multiplier effect”. https://channels.ft.com/thevalueofknowledge/infographic/ 15 Misra, S. and Ghadai, S. (2015), “Merit Goods, Education Public Policy– India At Crossroads”, Journal of Education and Practice, ISSN 2222-1735, Vol.6, No.12, 2015. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1080710.pdf 16 Based on World Bank data available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.XPD.TOTL.GD.ZS © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 13 Narrowing the educational divide

The benefits of education The monetary and non-monetary benefits to individuals and societies

Individual/family Community/society Monetary • Higher probability of • Higher productivity employment • More rapid economic • Greater productivity growth • Higher earnings • Poverty reduction • Reduced poverty • Long-run development

Non-monetary • Better health • Increased social mobility • Improved education and • Better-functioning health of children/family institutions/service delivery • Greater resilience and • Higher levels of civic adaptability engagement • More engaged citizenship • Greater social cohesion • Better choices • Greater life satisfaction

Source: EIU research; World Bank17

The importance of not only low in many parts of the developing world, educational quantity, but quality the average years of education across the world have been growing steadily at a rate While improving access to education and of 1.3% each year since 1990, and reached increasing the number of years of education 18 every child receives are important, the scope a global average of 8.5 years in 2019. As of education policy to influence this is limited access to education continues to grow, beyond a certain point. Although access to focus has been shifting towards enhancing even basic education remains alarmingly the quality of education being provided.

17 Angrist, N. et al (2018), “Learning-Adjusted Years of Schooling (LAYS)”, World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper 8591. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/243261538075151093/pdf/WPS8591.pdf 18 UNDP Human Development Reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/indicators/103006# © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 14 Narrowing the educational divide

Growth in education quantity Growth in education quantity Average years years of schooling of schooling across across the world the ( - ) world (1990-2020)

Very high human development High human development Medium human development

Low human development World

Source: United Nations Development Programme19

Schooling and education are not synonymous— World Bank, for example, adjusts the number the education or learning from one year of years of schooling attained by children of schooling varies substantially across on average in each country for the learning countries as, even though the quantity of achieved through this schooling, according to education remains the same, the quality average performance across standardised tests. varies.20 Research has found that what matters more for the individual and economy-wide At the individual level, analysis by Hanuschek benefits associated with education is not the et al. (2015) finds that measures of educational number of years of schooling, but its quality. quality such as numeracy and reading In fact, research goes as far as to suggest that proficiency explain differences in earnings “without improving school quality, developing between individuals even after accounting for countries will find it difficult to improve their any differences in years of schooling.22 Similarly, long run economic performance.”21 Moving at the economy-wide level, test scores which beyond quantitative measures of schooling, reflect educational quality are found to be new indicators are therefore now combining associated with more rapid economic growth. these measures with measures of the quality In fact, years of schooling no longer seem to of education. The learning-adjusted years of influence economic growth once quality is schooling (LAYS) indicator introduced by the accounted for.23 It seems, therefore, that what

19 UNDP Human Development Reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/indicators/103006# 20 Angrist, N. et al (2018), “Learning-Adjusted Years of Schooling (LAYS)”, World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper 8591. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/243261538075151093/pdf/WPS8591.pdf 21 Grant, C. (2017), “The contribution of education to economic growth”. Institute of Development Studies. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5b9b87f340f0b67896977bae/K4D_HDR_The_Contribution_of_Education_to_Economic_Growth_Final.pdf 22 See Angrist, N. et al (2018), “Learning-Adjusted Years of Schooling (LAYS)”, World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper 8591. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/243261538075151093/pdf/WPS8591.pdf 23 Angrist, N. et al (2018), “Learning-Adjusted Years of Schooling (LAYS)”, World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper 8591. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/243261538075151093/pdf/WPS8591.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 15 Narrowing the educational divide

matters more for individual and economic • Learning styles and teaching approaches. development is not how much schooling is Approaches to delivering learning have been received but how good that schooling is. rapidly evolving over the past decades, with a growing focus on tailored learning to match So if the quality of education is really what drives individual requirements. Education experts, the benefits that it creates, the key question Neil Fleming and Coleen Mills, developed then becomes: How can we ensure academic the VARK learning model which identified excellence? Research has identified a number of four types of learner, acknowledging the factors which influence the quality of education different approaches required to maximise and the learning outcomes it can generate: learning for each: visual learners, auditory • Levels of support and degree of student– learners, reading/writing learners and teacher interaction. The amount of support kinesthetic learners.26 Similarly, personality and direct teacher interaction provided to types such as introversion and extroversion students can play an important role in learning can impact learning preferences and the outcomes. The impact of class size has, for retention of information. In Susan Cain’s example, been widely studied. Two seminal book, Quiet: The Power of Introverts in papers provide evidence of the impact of a World that Can’t Stop Talking,27 one of smaller class sizes on learning quality: Project the critical differences identified between STAR and a 1999 analysis of Israeli schools introverts and extroverts is that extroverts by economists Joshua Angrist and Victor tend to get their energy from social Lavy. Using a regression model, Angrist and interaction, while introverts gain energy Lavy show that reducing class size induces from quiet spaces and a time to think and a significant and substantial increase in test reflect alone. Hence, to maximise learning scores for fourth and fifth graders (students outcomes we need teaching methods that typically between the ages of 9-11). are engaging, inspiring and effective for all.

Project STAR (the “Tennessee Study”)

From 1985 to 1989, 11,600 Tennessee students from kindergarten to third grade were randomly assigned to three class-size categories: 13–17 students, 22–25 students, and more than 25 students. An average student assigned to the smallest classes had a reading score nearly 8% higher than students in the medium-sized classes, and an average maths score which was 9% higher.24

Education economists Alan Krueger and Diane Schanzenbach further analysed Project STAR’s results to assess the long-run implications for students. They concluded that reducing class sizes from 22 to 15 students has a 5.5% return in annual benefits.25

24 Achilles, C. (2008), “Tennessee’s Student Teacher Achievement Ratio (STAR) project”, Harvard Dataverse, V1. https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:1902.1/10766 25 Krueger, A. and Schanzenbach, D. (2000), “The Effect of Attending a Small Class in the Early Grades on College-Test Taking and Middle School Test Results: Evidence from Project Star”, Princeton University, Industrial Relations Section Working Paper No. 427. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=223492 26 University of Kansas, “4 Different Learning Styles You Should Know: The VARK Model”. https://educationonline.ku.edu/community/4-different-learning-styles-to-know#:~:text=These%20different%20learning%20 styles%E2%80%94visual,understand%20their%20own%20learning%20preferences. 27 See Shulman, R. (2018), “10 Ways Educators Can Make Classrooms More Innovative”. https://www.forbes.com/sites/robynshulman/2018/11/19/10-ways-educators-can-make-classrooms-more-innovative/?sh=15f0e6c67f87 © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 16 Narrowing the educational divide

In his research, John Hattie synthesised many parts of the world, textbooks are also the findings from over 500,000 studies rapidly being replaced by digital learning which measure the impact of different tools such as electronic textbooks29 and teaching styles and approaches other online resources ranging from 28 on student achievement. basic use of the internet to gain access to information to sophisticated technologies • Complementary learning tools. In and advanced software that use artificial addition to the degree of interaction with educators and the teaching styles intelligence to deliver tailored learning 30 adopted, the tools used to support content. While there are drawbacks to learning can also play an influential role in these technologies, not least in terms of the ability of students to gain knowledge access and affordability, in many cases through learning. Historically, teaching they have been found to enhance the has evolved from the teacher being the quality of learning through improving the primary source of knowledge to this being learning experience and providing easy supplemented by textbooks. Today, in and up-to-date access to information.31

28 Hattie, J. (2003), “Teachers make a difference, what is the research evidence?”, Australian Council for Educational Research ACER). https://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=research_conference_2003 29 Chen, G. (2020), “Public Classrooms Say Goodbye Textbooks, Hello e-Texts”. https://www.publicschoolreview.com/blog/public-classrooms-say- goodbye-textbooks-hello-e-texts 30 Ross, T. (2015), “The Death of Textbooks?”. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/03/the-death-of-textbooks/387055/ 31 Chen, G. (2020), “Public Classrooms Say Goodbye Textbooks, Hello e-Texts”. https://www.publicschoolreview.com/blog/public-classrooms-say- goodbye-textbooks-hello-e-texts © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 17 Narrowing the educational divide

Enhancing education quality The cost and effectiveness of alternative means to improve the quality of education

Cost Evidence on Time to EIU Methods of enhancing (1-5; 1=high impact impact impact learning quality cost) (1–5; 1=low) (months) rating Levels of support Mentoring 3 4 0 months and degree of Peer tutoring 5 4 5 months student–teacher interaction Extension of 3 3 2 months school times Parental 3 3 3 months engagement One-to-one 2 4 5 months tuition Reducing 2 3 3 months classroom sizes Small group 3 2 4 months tuitions Learning styles Collaborative 5 4 5 months and approaches learning Individualised 5 3 3 months instruction Homework 5 2 2 months

Tailored learning 5 2 2 months styles Feedback 5 3 8 months

Within-class 5 2 3 months attainment grouping Complementary Digital 3 4 4 months learning tools technology and activities Arts 4 3 2 months participation Sports 3 2 2 months participation

Source: Education Endowment Foundation (2018)32, EIU analysis33

32 EEF Teaching and Learning Toolkit. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/evidence-summaries/teaching-learning-toolkit/ 33 EIU analysis places the following weights on each of the criteria to assess the overall impact of alternative means of enhancing the quality of education: cost = 30% weight; evidence on impact = 50% weight; time to impact = 20% weight © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 18 Narrowing the educational divide

The role of the internet in is far more restrictive—an evaluation of the enhancing the quality of education curriculum in Kenya, for example, concluded that English textbooks benefit primarily elite and While there are a number of ways to enhance academically stronger students. The internet the quality of education, the use of digital has the potential to facilitate the availability learning tools through access to the internet of resources in local languages and could is gaining particular traction due to both its produce achievement gains on a wider scale.34 impact on educational outcomes and its longer- term impacts on students by providing them Increased school connectivity and access to with high-in-demand digital skills that open digital learning tools also provide numerous doors to higher education and a wider range resources for teachers to enable them to of career options. These digital skills also allow both develop professionally and teach more communities to develop by enabling new and effectively. In developing countries, higher more effective approaches to doing business, internet penetration provides an opportunity to providing access to a greater online market. develop the skills of teachers in a cost-effective manner, which is particularly crucial when there The potential uses of the internet in the context of education are wide-ranging. From the is a shortage of qualified teachers. As access perspective of students, it puts access to learning to education across the world grows, there is a material and resources at the tips of their risk that the teaching profession could become fingers—including not only the best prepared unmanageable with growing class sizes—in this content, but also access to live or pre-recorded context, digital technologies can also support lessons led by the best teachers from around teachers by providing them with additional tools the world. The internet serves as a repository of and, through blended learning approaches, knowledge that is not restricted by geography freeing time for them to focus on teaching and is available to anyone with connectivity. It rather than on administration. Furthermore, allows the traditional schooling model to evolve, internet access enables teachers to focus facilitating access to a wealth of educational attention where it is needed by providing real- material. Meanwhile, access to textbooks time information on student performance.35

We need to address the sharp increase in heterogeneity in student preparation for school caused by recent expansions in access. Technology has several comparative advantages to complement teacher- led instruction on this front.

Alejandro Ganimian, Assistant Professor at New York University

34 Deloitte (2014), “Value of connectivity: Economic and social benefits of expanding internet access”. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/ Deloitte/ie/Documents/TechnologyMediaCommunications/2014_uk_tmt_value_of_connectivity_deloitte_ireland.pdf 35 Internet Society (2017), “Internet Access and Education: Key considerations for policy makers”. https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2017/internet-access-and-education/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 19 Narrowing the educational divide

Finally, in addition to the use of the internet by students and teachers, increased school connectivity provides policymakers with better tools to monitor and evaluate Without connectivity, the learning programmes. This enables more effective crisis is often hidden. The focus and agile policymaking to contribute to the overall quality of education across a nation. is on getting more children Digital tools can, for example, enable more into schools, but this doesn’t sophisticated Education Management mean that they are learning. Information Systems (EMIS), which can be Through better connectivity, used to disseminate to the government we can get data on a much more high-quality and timely data on educational frequent basis and improve 36 inputs, outputs and outcomes. overall learning outcomes.

Radhika Iyengar, Education Sector Director at Columbia University

Connecting students, students, teachers andteachers policymakers and policymakers The role of school connectivity in education The role of school connectivity in education

School internet connectivity

Facilitated Facilitated Government Students Teachers interaction interaction policy

Access to Reduced On-demand Real-time Real-time textbooks Professional burden of classes and access to monitoring and content development managing vocational learning of policy in desired courses large class courses outcomes implementation languages sizes

Access to Engagement Development real-time of external of digital information players in skills on student education performance

Source: EIU research

36 UNICEF (2020), “EMIS to monitor ICT in education”. https://iite.unesco.org/highlights/emis-and-ict-in-education/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 20 Narrowing the educational divide

COVID-19 and the widening Although it is clear that access to the internet role of the internet at home remains inadequate in many regions, the pandemic has accelerated a transition in Around April 2020, as part of measures to the model of education towards increased curb the spread of COVID-19, more than integration of digital technologies. Many 190 countries instituted nationwide school believe that it offers the opportunity to “build closures putting, in the blink of an eye, over back better” by re-imagining education and 1.6 billion students out of school-based how it is delivered.40 It has made us realise education.37 From schools transitioning to that: (a) it is not only access to the internet online classes, to office workers now working through schools, but also access at home that from home, all of sudden the internet— is important; and (b) how late we already are in and specifically, access to the internet at embracing and leveraging the full potential of home—became the solution to the threat of these technologies. In the world of education, complete social disconnection and economic the pandemic highlighted the variety of roles standstill posed by the global lockdown. In schools can play if teachers and students are fact, because of access to connectivity in the connected to the internet, from continuing to home, it is estimated that at least 100 million provide regular classes to offering physical and schoolchildren across the world were able to mental health guidance and, perhaps most continue learning. As a comparison, with the importantly, reducing the impact of isolation. levels of access available in 2000, a similar Educators also discovered a silver lining in the pandemic would have allowed less than 1.3 creative approaches they could take towards million children to remain connected.38 Yet, schooling. They have embraced novel ways of while progress has been made with 100 million interactive learning and have ultimately led the schoolchildren able to continue to learn during way in enriching life experiences and fostering the current pandemic, this represents only meaningful cultural exchanges while teaching one in 16 school-aged children—over 1.3 from remote locations. For many educators, it billion do not have access to the internet in would have been better if they were already their homes.39 connected and trained with internet tools.

Things have changed quite a bit with COVID-19. We now realise that communities play a big role beyond schools. The idea that children only learn in schools is an old model and we’re now moving beyond this idea. Technology and the internet enable an interface between the school and the community.” Radhika Iyengar, Education Sector Director at Columbia University

37 UNICEF (2020), “How many children and young people have internet access at home?”. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/ publications/UNICEF/How-many-children-and-young-people-have-internet-access-at-home-2020_v2final.pdf 38 Rastogi, V. et al (2020), “A $2 Trillion Plan to Bring Two Billion More People into the Digital Age”. https://www.bcg.com/en-in/publications/2020/plan- to-bring-high-speed-internet-access-to-two-billion-people 39 UNICEF (2020), “Two thirds of the world’s school-age children have no internet access at home, new UNICEF-ITU report says”. https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/two-thirds-worlds-school-age-children-have-no-internet-access-home-new-unicef-itu 40 Iyengar, R. (2020), “Education as the path to a sustainable recovery from COVID-19”, PROSPECTS volume 49, pages77–80(2020). https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11125-020-09488-9 © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 21 Narrowing the educational divide

While internet connectivity has enabled the initiated by the pandemic and the realisation continuity of learning for some, the transition of the need for internet connectivity in has not been seamless in all contexts, and general, the role of school connectivity and access to the internet to respond to the access to digital learning remains an important impacts of the pandemic has not been area of discussion for a number of reasons: an option for everyone.41 A World Bank report concluded that learning losses as a • Many children are returning to school. result of school closures could reduce the Many of the school closures instigated incomes across all impacted students by a by governments were short-term—by total of US$10 trillion over their lifetimes, September 2020, only 50% of learners with these costs falling disproportionately were still affected and this has continued on disadvantaged students42—this could to decline.44 As students return to school, translate into an income loss of approximately having access to the internet and digital 43 3% per student. There is no doubt that learning tools in their schools remains the digital divide is becoming all the more important. If anything, the temporary evident and is perpetuating inequalities. school closures have changed perceptions While the focus of this research is on on digital technologies in education and connectivity to the internet and access to have highlighted the benefits of the use digital tools through schools, the importance of online tools in supporting learning, and of internet connectivity for schoolchildren not just replacing traditional methods of regardless of their physical location—be teaching. Indeed, the need to provide digital it a school, home, the public library, or connectivity beyond schools is also now anywhere else—is now clearer than ever. recognised, but without diminishing the role Regardless of the shift in education models of school connectivity.

I don’t think physical schools will be going away anytime soon. Yes, some families might shift to a new hybrid form of education. But these are going to be the elites and those that have the ability to do so. So students that do show up in schools are likely to be those with more limited resources, making school connectivity all the more important.

Macke Raymond, Director of CREDO at Stanford University

41 Unwin, T. et al (2020), “Education for the most marginalised post‑COVID-19: Guidance for governments on the use of digital technologies in education”, EdTech Hub. https://edtechhub.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Education-for-the-most-marginalised-Report-Act-2-v8.pdf 42 World Bank (2020), “COVID-19 Could Lead to Permanent Loss in Learning and Trillions of Dollars in Lost Earnings”. https://www.worldbank.org/en/ news/press-release/2020/06/18/covid-19-could-lead-to-permanent-loss-in-learning-and-trillions-of-dollars-in-lost-earnings 43 Hanushek, E. and Woessmann, L. (2020), “The Economic Impacts of Learning Losses”, OECD. https://www.oecd.org/education/The-economic-impacts-of-coronavirus-covid-19-learning-losses.pdf 44 Unwin, T. et al (2020), “Education for the most marginalised post‑COVID-19: Guidance for governments on the use of digital technologies in education”, EdTech Hub. https://edtechhub.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Education-for-the-most-marginalised-Report-Act-2-v8.pdf

• Enabling connectivity for communities. • Obtaining government funding School connectivity is important not only for infrastructure development. for the benefits it provides to learners, Demonstrating the impact of developing but also for enabling wider connectivity telecoms infrastructure is a prerequisite for for communities. By creating demand for obtaining public sector financing. School telecoms services, school connectivity connectivity provides this impact. However, can make it commercially viable for the education budgets are already overstretched. infrastructure to be developed and can Hence, finding financing mechanisms also increase service quality and reduce that engage the private sector and other costs—a concept known as demand government entities will be crucial. aggregation.45 Connecting schools can serve to close both the educational divide and the digital divide. Schools are not only places where children learn, but also often community hubs—places where people vote, where public resources (like vaccines) are administered, and where Nobody gets a telecommunication people shelter during natural disasters, among connection for its own sake. You other community uses. Providing connectivity get it for the things that you can to a school is a way to empower children with do with it. Demonstrating the access to world-class digital content, but it is also a means to enable local entrepreneurship, impact of what you can do with provide access to online banking, improve it provides the missing link. information channels during emergencies or When you say that connectivity pandemics, and open doors for employment improves health or education through digital platforms and the gig economy. outcomes, that is where you It is through this lens that school connectivity can start to build solutions. becomes an important focus for achieving broader social and economic goals in Christopher Yoo, Director at the Center for communities on a global scale. Technology, Innovation and Competition at the University of Pennsylvania The remainder of this report focuses on the role of the internet in the context of schools, and the impacts of this connectivity not only for students, but also for the rest of society and wider economies.

45 USAID (2018), “Better connectivity, Better programs: How to implement a broadband demand aggregation program”. https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/15396/Better_Connectivity_Better_Programs_April2018.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 23 Narrowing the educational divide

3. Connecting schools, bridging gaps

Internet connectivity: the right to freedom of association and A basic human right assembly, the right to full participation in social, cultural and political life and the right Access to the internet is increasingly becoming to social and economic development.”47 a basic human right. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), As a society, we have not yet achieved universal adopted by 140 countries in 1989, established and affordable access to the internet for all. a legal framework for the basic human rights While the global internet penetration rate of every child to “grow, learn, play, develop and has increased substantially from 17% in 2005, flourish with dignity”.46 While the CRC pre- it remains only just over 50%.48 There are dates the widespread adoption of the internet, also large disparities between, and within, the challenges, threats and opportunities countries across rural and urban populations. posed by digital technologies in achieving its In developed countries, 87% of the urban aims and upholding the rights of children are becoming increasingly evident. As highlighted population has access to the internet. In the by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on least-developed countries, the figure stands freedom of opinion and expression: “access at only 25%—and for the rural population, to the internet is not only essential to enjoy access is even lower at 10%.49 Regionally, the right to freedom of expression, but also Europe has the highest internet usage rates, other rights, such as the right to education, while Africa has by far the lowest.50

46 UNICEF, Convention on the Rights of the Child. https://www.unicef.org/child-rights-convention/what-is-the-convention 47 United Nations General Assembly, 10 August 2011. https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Opinion/A.66.290.pdf 48 International Telecommunication Union (2020), “Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2020”. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/FactsFigures2020.pdf 49 Ibid. 50 Ibid. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 24 Narrowing the educational divide

Disparities in internet access Disparities in internet access The share share of ofindividuals individuals using using the internet the internet across regions across (%) regions (%)

World Africa Arab States Asia & Paciﬁc Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)

Europe The Americas

Source: : International Telecommunication Union 202051

Inequalities in school connectivity The inequality that a lack of school connectivity and access to digital learning creates begins The disparities in internet access across from childhood is perpetuated from that point countries at the national level are also reflected on—in many ways, as reflected by Henrietta in disparities in school connectivity. Lack of Fore, UNICEF Executive Director, “lack of access to the internet hampers access to internet access is costing the next generation education and denies the “right to education”, their futures.”53 Looking first at the opportunities, further widening educational gaps between or lack thereof, for children therefore forms the privileged and the deprived, or those a good starting point to evaluate the broader with internet access and those without.52 impacts of internet disconnectivity.

51 International Telecommunication Union. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx 52 Bajpai, R. (2020), “Right to Education & Emergence of a Digital Divide in Digital India”. http://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/right-to-education-emergence-of-a-digital-divide-in-digital-india/ 53 UNICEF (2020), “Two thirds of the world’s school-age children have no internet access at home, new UNICEF-ITU report says”. https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/two-thirds-worlds-school-age-children-have-no-internet-access-home-new-unicef-itu

Globally, it is estimated that 2.2 billion children connectivity are associated with poor quality and young people under the age of 25—or of education, with higher-income countries two-thirds of this age group—do not have displaying both greater connectivity and higher access to the internet.54 Differences in school quality of education (see chart below). Access internet access also give rise to differences to the internet in schools holds the potential in the quality of education within and across to equalise opportunities at an early age which countries, and threaten to widen the gap can then proliferate throughout childhood and in outcomes for students with and without adulthood—bringing not only benefits at an access. At the national level, low levels of school individual level but to society in its entirety.

Enhancing the quality of education Enhancing the quality of education The relationship relationship between between school school internet internet connectivity connectivity and education and quality education quality

Low income Middle income High income

Education quality (Learning-adjusted years of schooling)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . School internet connectivity (Index score -; = best)

Source: World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index (2017), World Bank Human Capital Index (2017)

54 UNICEF (2020), “How many children and young people have internet access at home?”. https://data.unicef.org/resources/children-and-young-people-internet-access-at-home-during-covid19/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 26 Narrowing the educational divide

Leveling the playing field benefits of access to resources, improved quality of education, better learning outcomes and As digital learning becomes increasingly enhanced employability.55 embedded within education curricula, the cost of a lack of school connectivity will grow. Studies have highlighted the significant The gap in educational outcomes between potential of school connectivity to bring schoolchildren with and without access to the direct benefits to individual students. The internet at school could widen more than ever chain of benefits begins from improved before. While the disparity in school connectivity learning outcomes for children, driven by creates a massive threat of economic and social improved access to learning resources and an divergence, it also highlights the significant enhanced quality of education. Combined with opportunity to level the playing field for all improved digital skills, the improved outcomes children regardless of geography or income for students also expand opportunities levels through efforts to improve access. A for further education. Beyond education, study by Deloitte found that internet access this then opens up doors to new career could be extended to an additional 640 million pathways, bringing higher income levels and children around the world, bringing with it the an overall improvement in quality of life.

Individual-levelIndividual-level beneﬁts benefits from school from connectivity school connectivity and access to digital learning PathwayPathway fromfrom improved improved connectivity connectivity to a better to a quality better of quality life of life

Improved income

Improved quality of Improved employability life

Improved opportunities in secondary/tertiary education

Improved education performance

Improved quality Improved access Improved digital of education to resources literacy skills

Improved school internet connectivity

Source: EIU

55 Deloitte (2014), “Value of connectivity: Economic and social benefits of expanding internet access”. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/ Deloitte/ie/Documents/TechnologyMediaCommunications/2014_uk_tmt_value_of_connectivity_deloitte_ireland.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 27 Narrowing the educational divide

If a student is studying about a particular topic in science, the amount of information they can get from an illustration in a textbook is very different to seeing a live simulation from digital content obtained through the internet - the ability to learn, and also to retain the information, is enhanced.

Eric Kimenyi, Teacher Training Program Manager at the African Institute of Mathematical Sciences

• Improving learning outcomes. Internet installation across schools in the country, connectivity has been rapidly evolving from internet access was found to lead to initial a nice-to-have to an essential element of modest improvements in maths scores, education. From putting access to knowledge but these impacts were found to grow and information at our fingertips, to enabling significantly over time as schools adapted new ways of interactive learning, the benefits by hiring teachers with computer training. 56 to learners are manifold. Johnston and Ksoll (2017) also evaluated a Through improving the quality of education, programme that broadcast live instruction school connectivity has been shown to via satellite to rural primary school students have positive impacts on learning outcomes in Ghana. The intervention improved the for children. Michigan State University numeracy scores of students in grades 2 conducted a 2018 study on the impact of through 4, as well as certain foundational internet access on student learning in Peru.57 literacy tasks,58 driven by improvements in Using variation in the timing of internet the quality of education.

56 UNICEF (2017), “Access to the internet and digital literacy”. Discussion Paper Series: Children’s Rights and Business in a Digital World. https://www.unicef.org/csr/css/UNICEF_CRB_Digital_World_Series_ACCESS.pdf 57 Kho, K. et al (2018), “Impact of Internet Access on Student Learning in Peruvian Schools”. Michigan State University, International Food Policy Research Institute. http://econ.msu.edu/repec/wp/Draft04-08-18.pdf 58 See Ganimian, A. et al. (2020), “Realising the promise: How can education technology improve learning for all”. The Brookings Institution, Center for Universal Education. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/edtech_playbook_full_v2.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 28 Narrowing the educational divide

The quality enhancement from school offering students a holistic education.59 connectivity and digital learning which These new channels of learning opened up results in improved learning outcomes comes by the internet offer significant potential to through a number of channels: improve the educational outcomes for those who are able to obtain access. - Access to learning resources. First, the internet provides access to unlimited - Dynamic adaptation of curricula. The learning resources where previously internet can also be used as a tool for students were restricted to the knowledge learning beyond the provision of learning of their teachers and the information resources. The ability to adapt learning contained within textbooks. Students in based on the specific needs of the child remote rural villages are suddenly able and in response to their abilities through to access not only static content, but also dynamic feedback loops both significantly on-demand or live content, produced and reduces the burden on teachers to tailor delivered by the world’s leading academics content to meet the needs of a wide range and educationalists, thus removing of abilities, and provides better learning geographical and income barriers in access outcomes for children. Recent research to quality education. Massively Open on the use of technology in education in Online Courses (MOOCs) are another form India has found that, for students with of digital learning that are also becoming low performance levels, the ability to increasingly popular as a means of receive personalised education based on supplementing traditional learning provided individual ability had a significant impact by schools and other educational settings, on performance in maths tests.60

Technology has the potential to expand access to learning materials, deliver content in ways that increase student engagement and adjust dynamically to each child’s level and rate of learning, and provide feedback to target the misconceptions underlying student errors. Very few software products that have been evaluated in developing countries leverage these comparative advantages.

Alejandro Ganimian, Assistant Professor at New York University

59 Selwyn, N. (2014), “The Internet and Education”. https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/articles/the-internet-and-education/ 60 De Barros, A. and Ganimian, A. (2021), “Which Students Benefit from Personalized Learning? Experimental Evidence from a Math Software in Public Schools in India”. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 29 Narrowing the educational divide

- Improvements in teaching quality. School connectivity can also facilitate improved teaching quality. The internet provides teachers with access to a range of resources, including collaboration with other teachers through online The first and foremost benefit Professional Learning Communities.61 of school connectivity is The internet and digital technologies can access to education resources. also be leveraged to deliver instructional With the availability of coaching to teachers through tools such connectivity, you can think as video calls with external observers. about decoupling great Analysis of teacher coaching programmes education from the specific conducted by researchers Matthew geography where it is Kraft and David Blazar62 found that they can significantly improve teaching consumed. You can, in effect, quality by as much as the difference in re-engineer the production effectiveness between a teacher with function of education.” zero years of experience and a teacher Macke Raymond, Director of with five–ten years of experience. This CREDO at Stanford University improvement in quality was also found to be reflected in student achievement.

Time to impact

While school connectivity has been shown to improve learning outcomes for students, in many cases these impacts are not immediate. Kho et al. (2018)63 conducted a study on the impacts of internet access in schools in Peru between 2007 and 2017, comparing schools with internet access with those that either had no access or that had obtained it at a later date. In the first 18 months, they found that schools with internet access reported only moderately higher performance of students on standardised maths tests of between 0.04 and 0.08 standard deviations. However, with each subsequent year, the divergence between students with and without internet access grew increasingly pronounced.

The growing impact of school connectivity was attributed to a number of factors. Among these, one of the main drivers was the hiring of teachers over time who were trained in using computers and the internet, and who could therefore more effectively integrate digital tools into their teaching. It was found that schools were more likely to have a computer-trained teacher by 2.1 percentage points up to one year after connecting to the internet, and by 9.6 percentage points up to five years later.

61 Fulton, K. and Riel, M. (1999), “Collaborative Online Continuing Education: Professional Development Through Learning Communities”. https://www.edutopia.org/professional-development-through-learning-communities 62 See Will, M. (2018), “Instructional Coaching Works, Says a New Analysis. But There’s a Catch”. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/instructional-coaching-works-says-a-new-analysis-but-theres-a-catch/2018/07 63 Kho, K. et al (2018), “Impact of Internet Access on Student Learning in Peruvian Schools”. Michigan State University, International Food Policy Research Institute. http://econ.msu.edu/repec/wp/Draft04-08-18.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 30 Narrowing the educational divide

• Improving digital literacy. Access to internet as a result, are 19% less likely to be interested connectivity and digital learning from an in a career related to science, technology, early age can help develop important lifelong engineering and maths (STEM) subjects.67 skills in digital literacy. In the coming years, These careers typically have a higher entry- emerging fields such as blockchain, big data, level salary than many other career choices, machine learning and artificial intelligence are impacting not only the options available to likely to be more accessible to individuals with individuals but also their earning potential. digital literacy skills, further compounding the influence of the internet. As such, digital literacy skills are becoming increasingly important in today’s world—a 2017 report by the House of Lords in the United Kingdom noted: “Digital literacy should be the fourth pillar of a child’s education alongside reading, In principle, integrating writing and mathematics and be resourced internet use in education and taught accordingly.”64 A joint study should improve student conducted by UNICEF and the London School of Economics compared data on learning. But in practice, there internet use among 15,000 schoolchildren could be some resistance across 11 countries, finding that online particularly from teachers who engagement is crucial for building digital may see it as a challenge to skills.65 These skills extend beyond educational their usual teaching process— benefits, also helping children develop it could lead to delays in the important social networks, encouraging setting-up of devices, potential them to engage in civic and political technical problems with activity, and providing a creative outlet. connectivity and a source of • Improving employability. Improved distraction with challenges in educational outcomes and the development having all students engaged of digital literacy skills resulting from increased and focused throughout the access to internet connectivity and digital lesson. The sustainability learning can also improve employability of providing the internet opportunities for schoolchildren. In the longer to schools could also be a term, this is associated with a strong positive hindrance in terms of paying impact on income levels and health outcomes for the monthly subscription.” for the individual.66 A study by the Quello Center at Michigan State University in the Eric Kimenyi, Teacher Training United States found that students with limited Program Manager at the African internet access have lower digital skills and, Institute of Mathematical Sciences

64 See Promethean (2018), “Digital literacy in the classroom. How important is it?”. https://resourced.prometheanworld.com/digital-literacy-classroom-important/ 65 UNICEF (2019), “Growing up in a connected world”. https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/GKO%20Summary%20Report.pdf 66 Deloitte (2014), “Value of connectivity: Economic and social benefits of expanding internet access”. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/ Deloitte/ie/Documents/TechnologyMediaCommunications/2014_uk_tmt_value_of_connectivity_deloitte_ireland.pdf 67 Quello Centre, Michigan State University (2020), “Broadband and student performance gaps”. https://quello.msu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Broadband_Gap_Quello_Report_MSU.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 31 Narrowing the educational divide

While there are a number of benefits of school connectivity and digital learning, it would be imprudent to ignore the potential downsides and risks.68 Indeed, the use of technology in classrooms can enable better learning, but at the same time it can create a distraction—in fact, some teachers see it as “overpriced distractions rather than useful teaching tools”.69 Other negative impacts of internet use in education include creating a distortionary effect on social interactions and isolating individuals when using technologies.70 Even more worrying are concerns around the vulnerability of children to cybercrime. A recent INTERPOL report noted a marked rise in online child exploitation during the pandemic driven by increased use of the internet.71

However, the unintended negative effects of school connectivity and access to digital tools do not preclude widespread adoption—in fact, it is generally agreed that the benefits far outweigh the costs.72 Instead, what the negative effects highlight is the need to monitor and manage the use of the internet in education in order to maximise its benefits rather than to eliminate its use altogether.

68 “12 Negative Effects of Technology in Education”. https://inspirationfeed.com/negative-effects-of-technology-in-education/ 69 Lynch, M. (2016), “The dark side of educational technology”. https://www.theedadvocate.org/dark-side-educational-technology/ 70 Alhumaid, K. (2019), “Four Ways Technology Has Negatively Changed Education”. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 9(4):10-20. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336969538_Four_Ways_Technology_Has_Negatively_Changed_Education 71 INTERPOL (2020), “INTERPOL report highlights impact of COVID-19 on child sexual abuse”. https://www.interpol.int/en/News-and-Events/News/2020/INTERPOL-report-highlights-impact-of-COVID-19-on-child-sexual-abuse 72 Olaore, I. (2014), “The Impacts (Positive and Negative) of ICT on Education in Nigeria”, Developing Country Studies, ISSN 2224-607X, Vol.4, No.23, 2014. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234682114.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 32 Narrowing the educational divide

4. Beyond the individual: The socioeconomic impacts of school connectivity and access to digital learning

School connectivity, learning for young people also typically tend to have outcomes and economic performance lower levels of economic development.73 Using cross-sectional country-level data in the chart In addition to the direct benefits that improved below, we can see a clear relationship between school connectivity can bring to each individual internet access in schools74 and economic child, these benefits can have larger multiplier development75 —countries with higher levels of effects on the wider community and the school connectivity typically also display higher economy as a whole. Data demonstrates levels of GDP per person. While it is likely that a clear negative correlation between the limited internet access in school is reflective percentage of children and young people of other inherent economic challenges which below the age of 25 without access to the constrain development—and hence that the internet and the Gross National Income observed correlation is not uniquely the result (GNI) per capita of a nation—in other words, of poor school connectivity—it is clear from the countries with limited access to the internet evidence that it plays a contributing role.

Contributing to growth ContributingThe relationship between to growth school internet connectivity and economic growth The relationship between school internet connectivity and economic growth

Low income Lower middle income Upper middle income High income

, GDP per capita, US $ () ,

. . . . . . . . . . . . . School internet connectivity (Index score -; =best)

Source: EIU, World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index (2017)

73 UNICEF (2020), “How many children and young people have internet access at home?”. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/ publications/UNICEF/How-many-children-and-young-people-have-internet-access-at-home-2020_v2final.pdf 74 Measured using the ‘Internet Access in School’ sub-indicator from the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index across 137 countries 75 Measured based on GDP per capita © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 33 Narrowing the educational divide

In accordance with neoclassical growth theory, on educational outcomes can elevate the GDP growth can be generated through either CVs of individuals entering the job market. 76,77 of the following means: This creates direct benefits to individuals • An increase in the quantity of inputs used in from increased employment opportunities. production (e.g. more investment in capital, a Beyond the individual benefits, however, bigger workforce, etc.); or, from a societal perspective, the increased supply of job market entrants with digital • An increase in the quality of inputs used in skills and academic excellence can also production (e.g. more effective investment indirectly stimulate economic activity. in capital, a more skilled and educated workforce, etc.), which results in greater The access to a highly skilled labour force output returns per each unit of input, also can provide the necessary impetus to known as productivity. This enables economic develop new technology-driven industries, growth driven by technological progress. particularly in developing countries. The city of Bangalore, for example, has established In the context of improved school itself as the Silicon Valley of India by building connectivity and access to digital learning, the wider economic impacts arise partly a digitally adept labour force that has as a result of the indirect benefits from allowed it to transition over time from low- the enhanced educational outcomes of skilled to high-skilled employment.78 each individual child, and the employment opportunities that these create. This can - Higher income levels. As average skill flow through a number of channels which levels in the labour force increase, feed through the labour market, namely income levels follow as a reward to improvements in the quantity and quality of individuals for having accumulated labour, facilitating technological progress. more skills. Higher wages lead to more consumer spending, thus stimulating the • Improvements in labour quantity. economy and bolstering job creation. - High-skilled job creation. The digital skills developed through internet access at Higher income levels can be a consequence schools from an early age and the impacts of the use of digital technologies in education, hence supporting economic growth. In Mexico, the rollout of telesecundarias (middle schools with lessons broadcast via satellite TV) When you enhance school internet had a long-term influence on the connectivity and build digital skills educational and employment trajectory at all levels, you are preparing of their graduates. Each additional year the country for the future. of education provided by the policy Mario Franco, Chairperson of Millenium@EDU increased average income by nearly 18%.79

76 OECD (2001), “Measuring productivity”. https://www.oecd.org/sdd/productivity-stats/2352458.pdf 77 Popa, F. (2014), “Elements of the neoclassical growth theory”. 78 Deloitte (2014), “Value of connectivity: Economic and social benefits of expanding internet access”. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/ Deloitte/ie/Documents/TechnologyMediaCommunications/2014_uk_tmt_value_of_connectivity_deloitte_ireland.pdf 79 Ganimian, A. et al. (2020), “Realising the promise: How can education technology improve learning for all”. The Brookings Institution, Center for Universal Education. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/edtech_playbook_full_v2.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 34 Narrowing the educational divide

• Improvements in labour quality. evidence shows, can improve educational outcomes and hence drive economic - Productivity growth. Access to a higher- growth through a similar channel. skilled workforce can drive improvements in labour productivity, thus stimulating - Improved digital skills. In addition to economic growth. Labour productivity enhancing productivity growth and estimates the level of output produced for economic growth through educational every unit of labour used in the production attainment, internet connectivity can spur process. While economic growth can be growth by providing future labour market achieved in the short run by increasing the participants with valuable digital skills. quantity of inputs, it is widely recognised A study in the United States found that that resource constraints make input-driven productivity loss due to low digital and growth unsustainable in the long run. For technological skills costs the US economy 83 medium-to-long-term GDP growth, an $1.3 trillion each year. Hence, digital economy requires productivity.80 skills development—through, for example, improving school connectivity—could By improving the quality of new entrants support productivity and economic growth. into the labour market, school connectivity and access to digital learning can support greater productivity and economic growth in the long term. Evidence shows that an increase in the level of education of the workforce is associated with greater In the long-run, students who have productivity. A study in the United acquired digital skills through States, for example, finds that changes having internet access in their in educational attainment across states between 1979 and 2012 were positively education are well equipped to correlated with growth in productivity.81 be able to take advantage of, and Other studies have built on this to show a use, these 21st century skills causal relationship between educational attained to be able to play a role attainment, productivity and economic in the growth and development growth. A study conducted in Mauritius of entrepreneurial creativity using data from 1990 to 2006 found that especially in a country like ours human capital development through (Rwanda), which continues investment in education increases to establish such an enabling productivity which contributes to environment and policies. economic growth.82 Expansion of access to internet connectivity and Eric Kimenyi, Teacher Training Program digital learning tools in schools is a Manager at the African Institute of form of investment in education which, Mathematical Sciences

80 Parliament of Australia, ‘Economic productivity report’. 81 Banerjee, A. et al. (2016), “Mainstreaming an Effective Intervention: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations of “Teaching at the Right Level” in India”. NBER Working Paper Series, Working Paper 22746. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w22746/w22746.pdf 82 Odit, M. et al (2010), “The Impact Of Education On Economic Growth: The Case Of Mauritius”. International Business & Economics Research Journal, Volume 9, Number 8. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/268106481.pdf 83 The University of Alabama at Birmingham, “The IT skills gap”. https://businessdegrees.uab.edu/blog/the-it-skills-gap/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 35 Narrowing the educational divide

Economic-level benefits from school connectivity and improved educational quality Pathway from improved connectivity to improved Economic-level beneﬁts from school connectivity and improved educational quality Pathwayeducational from improvedoutcomes connectivity to higher to GDP improved educational outcomes to higher GDP

Direct benefits (benefits to individual) Indirect benefits (wider socioeconomic benefits)

Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

Input quantity Input quality Technological progress

The quantity of inputs used in The quality of inputs used in Contributes to eciency and production (labour and capital) production (labour and capital) output, measured by factors contributes to total output drives productivity and including levels of R&D contributes to total output investment, national institutions; trade levels, etc.

Enablement of Increased demand technological Increased access to for goods and Increased labour highly skilled productivity from development services, requiring through increased employees in the labour force improved skills and labour force education digital acumen in expansion the labour force

Improved income

Improved quality of Improved employability life

Improved opportunities in secondary/tertiary education

Improved education performance

Improved quality Improved access Improved digital of education to resources literacy skills

Improved school internet connectivity

Source: EIU © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 36 Narrowing the educational divide

Enabling community development implemented in 2001 in Ohio to improve school ratings, found that a one standard Although one of the major ways in which deviation change in variables related to enhanced school connectivity and the use of school quality, such as teacher salary and digital learning tools can stimulate economic fourth grade pass rates in mathematics, was growth is through the educational channel, associated with a 3–5% increase in house school connectivity can also bring wider prices in the area.87 community-level benefits outside of the sphere of education. There is a view in public policy • Connecting communities. School research which is rapidly gaining support connectivity can also enable community- that education and community development wide connectivity. Typically, schools are are inextricably linked.84 The International the beneficiaries of investment in digital Telecommunication Union’s (ITU’s) Connect infrastructure,88 but once the infrastructure a School, Connect a Community initiative, is built, connectivity can then be delivered for example, is designed to leverage internet to the surrounding community. Schools, connectivity in schools in order to promote therefore, create the demand required to internet connectivity in communities by make investment in digital infrastructure using schools as ICT (information and worthwhile and profitable for private players. communications technology) centres and In rural communities with few households extending the digital facilities to members of the community.85

Not only does improved education—through internet connectivity or alternative means— Building connectivity to each allow for communities to develop over the long school provides a laser focus term as knowledge and skill levels increase, that gives us the means to there are more immediate benefits: achieve universal connectivity. • Making communities more attractive. The school serves as the node High-quality schools and education systems that provides connectivity to can incentivise families to relocate. The the surrounding community. increased demand for housing in certain communities has direct impacts on house Alex Wong, International Telecommunication prices and land values.86 A study on the Union (ITU), Chief, Special Initiatives, and ITU effects of the No Child Left Behind Act, Giga Co-Lead

84 Gallagher, M. and Burnstein, E. (2014), “The intersecting worlds of education and community development policy”. https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/intersecting-worlds-education-and-community-development-policy 85 International Telecommunication Union, “Connect a school, connect a community”. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Digital-Inclusion/Youth-and- Children/Pages/CSCC.aspx 86 Gallagher, M. and Burnstein, E. (2014), “The intersecting worlds of education and community development policy”. https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/intersecting-worlds-education-and-community-development-policy 87 Seo, Y. and Simons, R. (2009), “The effect of school quality on residential sales price”, JRER Vol. 31, No. 3, 2009. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/6935555.pdf 88 Lee, N. (2020), “Bridging digital divides between schools and communities”. https://www.brookings.edu/research/bridging-digital-divides-between- schools-and-communities/ 89 Battisti, D. (2002), “Demand aggregation to encourage infrastructure rollout to under-served regions”, Public Sector Broadband Procurement Workshop, WPIE/OECD, Paris, 4 December 2002. https://www.oecd.org/sti/ieconomy/2491219.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 37 Narrowing the educational divide

and businesses to support demand for • Narrowing the digital divide for children. connectivity, school connectivity can play Increased community connectivity can a major role in connecting the community. create a circular effect, further enhancing A study conducted in Italy demonstrated educational quality by providing students the benefits of increased public sector with access to the internet, not only through demand for connectivity in enabling schools but also in the home or other wider access to internet bandwidth and community areas such as libraries. While reducing prices.89 Research conducted school connectivity can go part of the way by UNICEF through the Giga initiative has in closing the digital divide, community also identified a link between school and connectivity goes a step further in closing the homework gap—the gap in ability of students community connectivity—investment with and without access to the internet in Sierra Leone and Niger to connect all outside of school to complete assignments schools is also expected to provide internet and engage in independent learning.92 access to 3 million and 7.2 million people, respectively, in their local communities.90

• Allowing businesses to grow. As communities are connected, digital doors are opened, giving rise to a wide range of opportunities for community development. By enabling the growth of digital marketplaces to connect buyers and sellers, for example, internet connectivity in communities can expand business operations and support community development, and ultimately economic growth. A 2020 report by the Internet Society on the impact of internet access in indigenous communities in North America found significant value for businesses across a range of industries, making business processes more efficient and streamlined and providing access to a wider range of suppliers and consumers.91 Rural businesses, for example, can perform financial transactions more safely and efficiently through the internet instead of relying on physical deposits of cheques and cash. © UNICEF/Panjwani

90 UNICEF (2021), “Connecting the dots: Impact outlook 2021”. https://gigaconnect.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Connecting-the-Dots-Giga- Impact-Outlook-2021_20p-1.pdf 91 Hudson, H. (2020), “The impact of internet access in indigenous communities in Canada and the United States: An overview of findings and guidelines for research”, Internet Society. 92 Lee, N. (2020), “Bridging digital divides between schools and communities”. https://www.brookings.edu/research/bridging-digital-divides-between- schools-and-communities/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 38 Narrowing the educational divide

Economic-level benefits from school connectivity and digital learning Economic-level beneﬁts from school connectivity Pathway from from improved improved connectivity connectivity to higher to GDP higher GDP

Direct benefits (benefits to individual) Indirect benefits (wider socioeconomic benefits)

Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

Input quantity Input quality Technological progress

Improved income

Improved quality of Improved Improved employability life Improved school internet school internet connectivity connectivity facilitates wider facilitates wider community community connectivity Improved opportunities in connectivity secondary/tertiary education

Improved education performance

Improved quality Improved access Improved digital of education to resources literacy skills

Improved school internet connectivity

Source: EIU

Beyond economic impacts access to digital learning can extend beyond impacts on economic growth through the In addition to the link to economic labour market. Enhanced digital literacy growth, evidence from literature also could give rise to a generation of savvier finds a link between improved school consumers, able to engage with digital connectivity and access to digital learning services and understand the implications and broader social outcomes. of their consumption patterns. This could allow for a digital transformation of the Improved education outcomes as a result community and economy—for example, of school connectivity and access to digital enabling e-government and other digital learning can support improved health services which reduce transaction costs and outcomes, survival rates and fertility rates, times. It could also support broader public 93 among other factors. The improved economic policy goals towards, for example, improved opportunities can help to pull individuals environmental sustainability. and families out of poverty and hunger in developing countries, bringing with them To build on the reflection of Janine Händel, significant health benefits and reducing CEO of the Roger Federer Foundation, who healthcare costs. remarked, “Education is not a goal in itself; it is a tool to attain other goals,”94 school Furthermore, the benefits of improved digital connectivity is not a goal in itself; it is a tool to literacy as a result of school connectivity and attain other goals.

By increasing the digital literacy of the population, you can drive benefits across sectors. Take, for example, the energy sector. Before, consumers only had an ‘on/off’ choice in their consumption. Now, with digital meters, it’s becoming more and more complex if a person wishes to use energy in an efficient way. To make the transition towards sustainable energy consumption, you need people to support the policies. And people will only support the policies if they understand how to do so. Ultimately, you need digital literacy to modernise all markets.

Mario Franco, Chairperson of Millenium@EDU

93 Grant, C. (2017), “The contribution of education to economic growth”. Institute of Development Studies. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/ media/5b9b87f340f0b67896977bae/K4D_HDR_The_Contribution_of_Education_to_Economic_Growth_Final.pdf 94 See “Education: The multiplier effect”. https://channels.ft.com/thevalueofknowledge/infographic/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 40 Narrowing the educational divide

5. What’s to gain from connecting schools?

Measuring the gains from improved • Finland, which ranks third in the world school connectivity on the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index in terms of the quality From improving the outcomes for children of its education system (after Switzerland and in education, to contributing to the overall Singapore), and also has among the highest socioeconomic development of a nation, levels of access to the internet in schools. the benefits of investing in the education of children through improving access • Rwanda, which scores the highest to connectivity can be immense. In this across developing countries in terms section, we seek to quantify the potential of both internet access in schools and economic gains from increased levels of the quality of the education system school connectivity across a selection of based on the World Economic Forum’s 95 representative countries: Brazil, El Salvador, Global Competitiveness Index. Kyrgyzstan, Niger and Sierra Leone. In these • South Korea, which scores the highest countries, access to the internet in schools falls on the EIU’s Inclusive Internet Index below average levels, so there is significant (2020) in terms of its availability of scope for gains from improving access. In internet connectivity nationally.96 other countries, however, the challenge is not in terms of the availability of access but We use these benchmark countries not in the quality of that access and where it is specifically as benchmarks for how to improve provided (e.g. schools vs homes). The United school connectivity, but for what the potential States provides an example and we explore gains on offer are to other countries if they are the potential gains not from improving able to achieve these levels of connectivity. connectivity, which is already high, but from improving the speed of connectivity. Our findings are founded in econometric analysis which uses data across 105 countries Across the first set of countries in our over time to quantify the relationships between analysis (Brazil, El Salvador, Kyrgyzstan, school connectivity, education outcomes for Niger and Sierra Leone), we assess students and economic growth. This allows us to current levels of school connectivity, capture both the economic impacts of improved and estimate the potential gains from school connectivity through educational gains matching these levels with those observed for children, and the wider benefits through in three selected benchmark countries: community development and other channels.

95 World Economic Forum (2020), “Global Competitiveness Report Special Edition 2020: How Countries are Performing on the Road to Recovery”. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2020 96 The Economist Intelligence Unit (2020), “The Inclusive Internet Index 2020”. https://theinclusiveinternet.eiu.com/assets/external/downloads/3i- executive-summary.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 41 Narrowing the educational divide

The pathways through which school connectivity can stimulate socioeconomic development are complex and interlinked. By assessing each pathway individually, there is a risk of: (a) double-counting some of the impacts which operate in an interrelated way; and/or (b) omitting specific channels of impact. In order to overcome this challenge, our approach assesses the overall impact of school connectivity on economic growth (reflected in GDP) without disaggregating the different channels through which this is derived. The relationships assessed through the model include:

1. The relationship between school connectivity and learning outcomes, to identify the individual-level impacts of school connectivity.

2. The relationship between learning outcomes and economic growth, which, combined with the relationship between school connectivity and learning outcomes, provides an assessment of the impact of school connectivity on GDP through improvements in learning outcomes.

3. The relationship between school connectivity and economic growth, to assess all channels through which school connectivity can stimulate economic growth including, but also beyond, education (for example, through enabling community-level connectivity).

Model framework Model framework Simplifying complex complex pathways pathways to assess to theassess impact the of impactschool connectivity of school connectivity

Direct benefits (benefits to individual) Indirect benefits (wider socioeconomic benefits) Channels captured through EIU model

Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

Input quantity Input quality Technological progress

Improved income Improved quality of life Improved employability

Improved opportunities in secondary/tertiary education

Improved education performance

Improved quality of education Improved access to resources Improved digital literacy skills

Improved school internet connectivity

Source: EIU

As noted, in many countries the challenge speed of connectivity available to students is less in terms of access per se and more in and economic outcomes. The analysis terms of the quality of access. In the United employs state-level data from the United States, 99% of schools are connected to fibre States over time. Using the findings from the infrastructure to access the internet, but model, we assess the potential economic connection speeds vary substantially across gains from improving the speed of school 97 states. To assess the impact of improving not internet connectivity across the country. only access but also the quality of this access, we have developed a second series of models A more detailed discussion of the methodology to investigate the relationship between the is provided in Appendix B of this report.

97 EducationSuperHighway (2019). https://stateofthestates.educationsuperhighway.org/?postalCd=AL#state © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 44 Narrowing the educational divide

Limitations of quantifying the impact of connectivity

The analysis presented in this report uses • Robustness of the model: A number a novel approach to estimate the potential of challenges can arise in specifying gains from improving access to internet econometric regression models which connectivity in schools. However, in using can affect their ability to discern a truly and interpreting the results, there are causal relationship between school a number of caveats and limitations: connectivity and economic outcomes. Despite this, the findings suggest some • Data availability: A key limitation of degree of correlation and co-movement. the regression analysis is the lack of data availability. As a result, in many • Assessing transmission mechanisms: cases, imperfect proxy indicators While the analysis assesses the are used to assess the relationships overall relationship between being tested. Furthermore, data gaps school connectivity and economic need to be filled using interpolation outcomes, it does not identify the techniques. These adjustments introduce specific channels through which this a degree of measurement error in the relationship arises. Future research analysis and can bias the outputs of could use experimental approaches the regression models. Future analysis and survey techniques to track the could establish new data and measures implications of school connectivity at of school connectivity to support an individual level, and then assess how further research and analysis and to these translate into wider benefits. measure the progress of countries in improving their levels of connectivity. • Assessing macroeconomic impacts: • Short-term vs long-term impacts: Given The analysis uses an econometric the limited availability of historical data, approach to assess the macroeconomic the models primarily capture the short- impacts associated with improved term impacts associated with improved school connectivity which assumes that school connectivity. It is reasonable a change in connectivity will have the to assume that while benefits to same impact on GDP growth across all individual students in terms of improving countries. In reality, country-specific school performance may be relatively factors will affect the extent to which immediate, socioeconomic impacts are connectivity can be translated into likely to arise with a substantial time lag. economic gains. General equilibrium The socioeconomic impacts could be models could be explored in the future underestimated by the model as a result. to account for country-specific nuances.

Improving access to Index (see box below) can increase GDP per school connectivity capita by 0.11%. Of these total gains, 11.5% are associated with improvements in learning By investigating cross-country data on outcomes for children which drive wider school connectivity and economic outcomes, our analysis estimates the following: economic benefits, while the remaining 88.5% of the gains are associated with broader • A 1% increase in school connectivity98 with channels of impact from improved school increased access to, and use of, the internet connectivity including, for example, improved in schools can improve learning outcomes for students by 0.06%.99 community connectivity. Given the short-term nature of the modelling exercise, the model • A 1% increase in the learning does not fully capture the long-term impacts outcomes for students can increase of improved school connectivity on GDP, GDP per capita by 0.19% hence the GDP impacts—particularly through • A 1% increase in school connectivity can improved learning outcomes which are likely to increase GDP per capita overall by 0.11% take time to translate into economic benefits— Overall, we find that a 1% improvement are expected to be underestimated. The results in a country’s performance on the World should, therefore, be interpreted as the short- Economic Forum Internet Access in Schools term impacts of improving school connectivity.

World Economic Forum: Internet Access in Schools Index

Our measure of school connectivity a given country. This includes, for is based on data published by the example, the enrolment rate across World Economic Forum. Its Global educational levels, staff training, and Competitiveness Index provides a cross- access to the internet in schools. country assessment of progress towards developing long-term competitiveness The Internet Access to Schools indicator through productivity growth. It scores scores countries on a scale from 1 to 7 (7 countries against 12 key pillars of being the highest) based on an executive competitiveness, including one pillar opinion survey response to the following focused on education and training. question: “In your country, to what extent is the Internet used in schools for learning Within the education pillar, the purposes?” The overall score is based on assessment covers a range of the average response in each country indicators to provide a comprehensive out of a sample of over 14,000 business view of the quality of education in executives in more than 148 countries.

98 Measured based on the World Economic Forum Internet Access in Schools index, which assesses the extent to which the internet is used in education across countries based on survey data. The data can be accessed at: https://tcdata360.worldbank.org/indicators/ hbfab20aa?indicator=571&viz=line_chart&years=2007,2017 99 Measured based on the World Bank’s estimation of adjusted years of schooling which adjusts the average expected years in schooling in each country to account for the quality of the education provided reflected in student test scores. The data can be accessed at: https://databank.worldbank.org/source/human-capital-index# © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 46 Narrowing the educational divide

Based on the identified relationship Quantifying the gains between school connectivity and GDP per capita, through improved learning Estimated relationship between improved outcomes and other factors, we can assess school connectivity and individual- Quantifying the gains the potential gains from improving school Estimatedlevel and impacts economy-wide from improving outcomes school connectivity connectivity levels. In each of our key Impacts countries of assessment, current levels of school connectivity fall substantially below

+.% international benchmarks in both developed and developing countries. Niger, for example, scores only 2.1 out of 7 on the World Economic Forum Internet Access in School Individual-level Economy-wide beneﬁts beneﬁts Index, while Rwanda—the highest-performing developing country—scores 4.5. As a result, increasing school connectivity levels in Niger could bring individual and economic gains.

+.% +.%

School internet Learning-adjusted years GDP per capita connectivity of schooling

Source: EIU analysis

How do do they they compare? compare? School connectivity connectivity across across key and key reference and reference markets (Index markets score (Index -; =best) score 1-7; 7=best)

Key markets Reference markets

. .

. . . . . .

Niger Sierra El Salvador Kyrgyzstan Brazil Rwanda South Finland Leone Korea

Source: World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index; EIU analysis100

100 Note: The World Economic Forum database does not include school connectivity data on Niger. The EIU has used proxy analysis to estimate connectivity levels in Niger using Chad as a reference country based on the similarity between the two countries in terms of their performance on the Human Development Index and their national levels of broadband connectivity based on ITU data. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 47 Narrowing the educational divide

Across the countries in our analysis, increasing could increase the learning-adjusted years school connectivity levels to match the of schooling for children from 7.8 years on levels in reference markets can result in average to 8.0–8.2 years (an increase of improvements in the average learning- 1.3–3.8%), depending on the level of ambition. adjusted years of schooling received by children. This means that for the same By improving school connectivity levels, quantity of schooling, we can improve the the benefits are not limited to individual quality of schooling for children. In Niger, children through improvements in the where school connectivity levels score 2.1 quality of education, but are spread through out of 7, improving connectivity to match society and increase overall levels of income Rwanda levels could increase the learning- and well-being. Our analysis finds that in adjusted years of schooling from 2.7 years on Niger, improvements in school connectivity average to 2.9 years (a 7% increase). A more under each of our scenarios could increase ambitious increase in connectivity to match GDP per capita from US$550 in 2025 Finland could increase learning-adjusted years of schooling by 11% to 3.0 years. Even by between 12–19%. In Brazil, where countries with higher levels of connectivity connectivity levels are higher, the gains stand to gain from further improvements. are smaller in magnitude but still sizable, Brazil, for example, scores 3.7 out of 7 in with the potential for increasing GDP per terms of school connectivity levels, but capita from US$11,500 in 2025 by 2–7%.

From school connectivity to learning outcomes FromGains school in learning-adjusted connectivity to learning years of outcomes schooling (average years Gainsper student) in learning-adjusted under alternative years of schooling scenarios (average years per student) under alternative scenarios

Baseline Scenario : Rwanda Scenario : South Korea Scenario : Finland

. . Kyrgyzstan . .

. . Brazil . .

. . El Salvador . .

. . Sierra Leone . .

. . Niger . .

Source: EIU analysis

From school connectivity to economic gains From school connectivity to economic gains Gains in in GDP GDP per per capita capita (US $) under under alternative alternative scenarios scenarios () (2025)

Baseline Scenario : Rwanda Scenario : South Korea Scenario : Finland

, , , , , , ,

, , Brazil , ,

, , El Salvador , ,

, , Kyrgyzstan , ,

Niger

Sierra Leone

Source: EIU analysis © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 49 Narrowing the educational divide

Improving the quality of access connected. The challenge for schools is to school connectivity therefore not in providing access, but in ensuring that access is of high quality. Here, In many developed countries, while schools there is substantial variation at the state have access to connectivity, the quality of level, with the average bandwidth available access can be poor or variable. For connectivity to students ranging from approximately to be useful in the context of education it needs 200 kilobits per second (Kbps) to almost to be not only available, but also of high quality. 3,000 Kbps. While above the average The quality of internet connectivity can be international bandwidth per head of measured in terms of the speed of bandwidth. 142 Kbps, there is still significant scope for enhancement across all states, and In the United States, the vast majority of particularly in states where the average schools across states are well-connected to speed is low—in 2017, the average bandwidth internet infrastructure, with the exception per person in Luxembourg, for example, of Alaska where only 62% of schools are was 8,135 Kbps according to ITU data.101

Quantity vs quality of school connectivity Quantity vs. quality of school connectivity Access to to school school connectivity connectivity and bandwidth and bandwidth per student per across student US states, across US states, 2019

North Carolina Conneticut Oklahoma

Maine Maryland South Dakota Wyoming North Dakota New Hampshire Idaho Montana Utah

% of schools with ﬁbre infrastructure

Alaska

, , , , , ,

Median bandwidth per student (kbps)

Source: EducationSuperHighway State of the States 2019

101 International Telecommunication Union. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 50 Narrowing the educational divide

Our regression analysis of data across average bandwidth to the highest average states shows that a 1% increase in the speeds currently available. Based on data average bandwidth (Kbps) available to from EducationSuperHighway, North Dakota students can increase state-level GDP currently offers students the highest average per capita by 0.01%. We explore the broadband speeds—while the state forms potential gains to US states from increasing an outlier in terms of its population size and bandwidth under two scenarios: economic make-up, it offers a benchmark for what other states in the country could achieve • Scenario 1: National average. Increasing in terms of internet speed for students. bandwidth levels across all states to match the national average of 676 Kbps The estimated gains from improving the speed of broadband connectivity in the • Scenario 2: Highest available speed. United States are only the tip of the iceberg Increasing bandwidth levels to match in terms of what could be achieved through the highest average bandwidth currently other measures to improve both access available to some students of 2,980 Kbps and the quality of access. President Biden’s Our analysis shows that, across the country as proposed Infrastructure Bill, for example, a whole, total GDP in 2025 could increase by calls for investment of US$100 billion in between US$78 million (equivalent to a 0.4% broadband connectivity,102 which would be increase) from increasing average bandwidth expected to generate gains far in excess of the to the national average and US$1.1 billion estimated gains of up to US$1.1 billion from (equivalent to a 5.5% increase) from increasing improving broadband speed for students.

From bandwidth to economic gains FromGains bandwidth in GDP per to capitaeconomic under gains alternative scenarios (2025) Gains in GDP per capita under alternative scenarios, US$ ()

Baseline Scenario : National average Scenario : North Dakota

Baseline ,

Scenario : National average ,

Scenario : North Dakota ,

, , , , , , ,

Source: EIU analysis

102 https://variety.com/2021/digital/news/biden-infrastructure-plan-broadband-funding-1234941504/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 51 Narrowing the educational divide

One of the major challenges in the United Addressing the homework gap in the States in terms of connectivity for students United States by equalising internet access relates not to the availability, or the speed, across households could result in significant of connections through schools, but to the economic gains—and these are likely to be availability of access to the internet and significantly higher than those estimated digital devices at home—the “homework from increasing broadband speed alone. The gap”. While only 743 (or 1% of) schools are Emergency Broadband Benefit programme, yet to be connected to the internet,103 25% of households—particularly low-income introduced by the Federal Communications households in rural areas—do not have Commission, seeks to address this by making broadband.104 This means that children in internet services and devices more affordable these households do not have access to the for eligible low-income households. It internet to support learning at home through offers a one-time discount of up to US$50 completing homework or independent study. on broadband service, and up to $100 to At least 70% of teachers across the country purchase a digital device such as a laptop or set homework which requires the use of the computer.106 By narrowing the digital divide internet,105 creating a significant disadvantage across the country, and by extending access for students without access (through broadband or other means of connecting to to communities and not just to students, the internet such as via smartphones) and this programme, along with others, could widening the divide between them and those result in economic and social gains beyond students fortunate enough to have access. those to the families that directly benefit.

103 EducationSuperHighway (2019). https://stateofthestates.educationsuperhighway.org/?postalCd=AL#state 104 Pew Research Centre (2021). https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/internet-broadband/ 105 MIT Technology Review (2020). https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/10/13/1010243/jessica-rosenworcel-homework-gap-key-to-americas- digital-divide/ 106 https://www.fcc.gov/broadbandbenefit © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 52 Narrowing the educational divide

6. So, where do we go from here?

Making the potential gains a reality 3. Embedding the use of the internet and digital learning in education. Once While there are substantial potential gains on affordable access to school connectivity and offer from increasing school connectivity—both digital content has been achieved, they must for individuals and wider society—making be effectively integrated into curricula and these a reality is easier said than done. First, education practices. This requires a change school connectivity levels remain low in many in the approach to delivering education. It parts of the world, despite the benefits it can also requires that teachers are trained to offer. This is illustrative of barriers to increasing deliver these new approaches, and that they, connectivity—if there were no barriers, it would and their students, have the tools to do so. beg the question: why aren’t connectivity levels higher when they offer so many benefits? 4. Protecting children online. While the Furthermore, obtaining access to the internet expansion of school connectivity comes alone does not guarantee that students and with numerous learning opportunities teachers will be able to translate this into for children, it also opens up new doors academic benefits, or that these benefits will for child abuse and exploitation. These subsequently generate wider socioeconomic significant risks associated with the benefits. School connectivity is a necessary but expansion of internet access can often not the sole condition for achieving the gains. create resistance to its use in education from parents and teachers. Enabling the So, what needs to happen next? Based safe and secure use of the internet will be on interviews with experts, the EIU critical in leveraging the benefits it can offer. identifies four key priorities:

1. First and foremost, collaboration is key. A holistic strategy—with cross-government and private sector collaboration—is needed If socio-economic development is to coordinate efforts across stakeholders to linked to internet connectivity then overcome barriers to school connectivity why isn’t every government on the and enable its effective integration with planet trying to connect everybody education systems. in their country and making it a 2. Accessibility and affordability. Building priority? There are many hurdles infrastructure to enable access to the we need to overcome to ‘take the internet is the starting point for beginning internet out of jail’. Changing to realise the benefits it can offer. But mindsets will be crucial and having the option to access the internet possibly the most difficult. But there is different to being able to access it in a are also physical barriers which meaningful way—poor quality and high cost make no sense—regulatory barriers, can act as roadblocks. Working together, customs barriers, and others. governments, businesses and telecom providers should aim to continually improve Jane Coffin, Senior VP for Internet Growth at the quality and affordability of connectivity. the Internet Society

From theory theory to practice to practice A framework for making the theoretical gains from improved school connectivity a reality A framework for making the theoretical gains from improved school connectivity a reality

Coordinated and strategic policy

Accessible and Integration of the Protecting a ordable connectiviy internet in education children online

Investment in Teacher training Safety in infrastructure programmes internet usage

Access to hardware e.g. Access to electricity Regulation laptops/desktops

High-speed broadband Remaining learning Dealing with connectivity curricula perpetrators

A ordable pricing

Multiple access points for children

Source: EIU

Bringing it all together: The Finnish experience

In 2010, Finland became the first developed by the Ministry of Education country in the world to make access to and Culture. A total grant of €10 million the internet a legal right,107 rather than was earmarked for the intervention. a privilege reserved for those with the means of access. The government set • National curriculum reforms: The itself the ambitious target of working entire curriculum for students from with telecoms providers to connect pre-primary to upper secondary was all individuals to a 1 megabit per transformed to incorporate the use of ICT. second (Mbps) internet connection. The initiative was supported by a number of programmes and plans including: While the strategic direction set by the government was commendable, a number - The New Comprehensive School of challenges emerged over the following action plan provided guidance to decade in terms of internet access in schools to implement new curricula, education. Inequalities in access to schools with an emphasis placed on finding across parts of the country became local student-centric solutions evident, along with challenges in the through experimentation digitalisation of educational resources.108 - The Diagbi project was implemented To address these challenges, the Finnish to put in place digital technology- government set a number of key priorities based assessment, increasing during 2016–18. These focused on the number of school tests reforming education curricula to fully administered electronically leverage the power of the internet, alongside a concerted effort for capacity- - Linkkiapaja, an online open portal, was building to strengthen teachers’ skills in the established to facilitate the sharing use of the internet. Some of the specific of learning resources in addition to initiatives implemented included: 109 the Edustore which supplemented free resources with commercially • Teacher training programme: The provided education material Finnish National Agency for Education established a training programme The Finnish experience and the approach with 2,500 tutor teachers recruited taken by the government highlight the need to train their colleagues in the use of to achieve not only access to connectivity IT for education. Alongside peer-to- in schools, but also an integrated approach peer training, online courses were to embedding technology in education

107 BBC (2010), “Finland makes broadband a ‘legal right’”. https://www.bbc.com/news/10461048#:~:text=Finland%20has%20become%20the%20 first,legal%20right%20for%20every%20citizen.&text=The%20Finnish%20deal%20means%20that,at%20a%20minimum%201Mbps%20speed. 108 European Schoolnet (2017), “Finland: Country report on ICT in education”. http://www.eun.org/documents/411753/839549/Country+Report_ Finland_2017.pdf/f106f29c-7092-44e3-9ecf-5ae24b521cab 109 Ibid. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 55 Narrowing the educational divide

1. First and foremost, collaboration is key

Good policymaking begins with effective, strategic leadership from the top. In order Even before we think about the to overcome the barriers and challenges to provision of internet connectivity enhancing school connectivity and integrating for schools, having a national it effectively and safely within education, vision is important as this lays out leadership from the public sector plays a key the bigger picture for the nation role. But the public sector working alone will as a whole and hence enables the not be able to achieve connectivity for all— implementers to see where it is they effective collaboration is needed between want to go and how to get there the public and private sectors, coordinating across multiple stakeholders including the and in this case in particular, the government, telecoms providers, schools and linkages between the education businesses to make public sector strategy and ICT sectors. In Rwanda, the a reality. Estonia, for example, is a leading different National Information and example of a country that has moved beyond Communication Infrastructure the view that the government is solely (NICI) plans were developed and responsible for educational outcomes, with implemented and it is through these numerous public–private partnerships in NICI plans that the ‘One Laptop per place to create joint solutions and implement Child’ programme was initiated technology in education. This allowed the country to rapidly respond to school closures and implemented. These plans and during the COVID-19 pandemic.110 policies allowed for further strategic thinking on the side of policymakers Leadership from the centre of government can and enabled the implementers to set a strategy and direction of travel for the start to ask themselves questions education sector, and how technology and the and find and propose solutions. For internet fits into this. As noted in a recent report published by the EdTechHub, “The overarching example: What needs to be put in emphasis should be on the education not the place before laptops come in? Well, technology.”111 The onus is on ministries of you need electricity to begin with - education to develop their strategic direction for how can the Ministry of Education education in the country, and to identify where work then with the Ministry of technology can support. Once governments Infrastructure to prioritise learning have established the need for technology to institutions in the national meet their goals for education, the natural next electricity roll-out plans?” question is: how? This then allows for strategic planning around overcoming the barriers Eric Kimenyi, Teacher Training Program to school connectivity and committing to Manager at the African Institute of expanding connectivity for all. Mathematical Sciences

110 Education Estonia (2021), “Three ways public-private partnerships are transforming education. Insights from Estonia”. https://www.educationestonia.org/education-public-private-partnerships-in-estonia/ 111 Unwin, T. et al (2020), “Education for the most marginalised post‑COVID-19: Guidance for governments on the use of digital technologies in education”, EdTech Hub. https://edtechhub.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Education-for-the-most-marginalised-Report-Act-2-v8.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 56 Narrowing the educational divide

Once a strategy has been set, it can’t operate benefits. Successful examples of technological in silos. A collaborative effort is needed adoption in education are often associated to deliver the strategy with coordination with multi-player coordination and integration across all parts of government and relevant led by strong leadership from the top. In the private sector players. While the ministry UAE, for example, the Mohammed Bin Rashid of education can set a vision for education Smart Learning Programme established new in the country which identifies the need for ways of learning through smart devices. The internet connectivity, without working closely programme was led by Sheikh Mohammed with telecoms regulators and providers, it will bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Vice President and be unable to deliver on this vision. Similarly, without working with the private sector both Prime Minister of the UAE, who facilitated to develop relevant online content, and to coordination and mobilisation across the understand business needs and the skills key players: the Ministry of Education, the required in the workforce, the connectivity Telecommunications Regulatory Authority and provided will not be able to drive the maximum the Prime Minister’s Office.112

112 Mohammed Bin Rashid Smart Learning Program. https://www.moe.gov.ae/En/SmartLearning/Pages/Home.aspx © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 57 Narrowing the educational divide

The case of Portugal: Coordinating across stakeholders to integrate technology in education113,114,115

Launched in 2007, the eEscola programme success of the programme: effective in Portugal highlights the importance leadership and a collaborative model.” of strong leadership, combined with cross-stakeholder coordination, in In addition to leadership, one of the drivers successfully implementing the use of collaboration was the fact that all of technology in education. stakeholders gained from the programme. Mr Franco reflected: “It was a win–win– eEscola aimed to provide students win across all stakeholders. For the and teachers with affordable access to government, direct taxes collected from computer equipment, along with mobile the programme exceeded the investment broadband internet connectivity. By made. The telecoms operators that were combining both hardware and connectivity, part of the programme also recuperated it addressed some of the challenges their investment with an almost associated with policies focusing on the instantaneous increase in demand for their provision of digital equipment such as services. Finally, consumers were able to personal computers without jointly offering get a laptop and internet connection at internet access to use the equipment. half the price they would have otherwise.”

The programme was a key component With over 1.7 million beneficiaries, eEscola of the Portuguese Technological Plan helped to bridge Portugal’s digital divide. for Education, driven by government It also strengthened the use of technology departments in collaboration with the in education and gave rise to the adoption private sector and with the support of of new methods of learning. Student the Prime Minister. A key characteristic performance on standardised tests of eEscola was the coordination that this improved significantly as a result, as did the leadership enabled across the Ministry overall competitiveness of the economy, of Education, telecoms operators and reflected in Portugal’s jump from 31st consumers. Mario Franco, Programme position in the Global Competitiveness Manager for eEscola noted: “There Index (Technological Readiness) in 2010–11 are two main factors that led to the to 19th position the following year.

113 Franco, M. (2014), “Portugal’s eEscola earns top marks”, World Bank Group, Handshake: A quarterly journal on public-private partnerships, Issue 15, October 2014. https://library.pppknowledgelab.org/documents/1958/download 114 Trucano, M. (2012), “Around the World with Portugal’s eEscola Project and Magellan Initiative” https://blogs.worldbank.org/edutech/portugal 115 Pereira, S. (2016), “The Portuguese programme ‘one laptop per child’ and its impact on families: a study on parents’ and children’s perspectives”, Observatorio, Volume 10, No. 1, Lisboa, January 2016. http://www.scielo.mec.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1646-59542016000100006 © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 58 Narrowing the educational divide

2. Building accessible and if the cost is too high, connectivity for all will still affordable connectivity not be achieved. Similarly, we may be able to get everyone connected to the internet, but if the Once a strategy for education has been set quality and speed of the connection is low, its by leadership and there is a recognition of use is limited. the benefits of connectivity in education, the starting point for realising these benefits is Recognising the need for available, affordable expanding connectivity to all. As stated by Tim and accessible telecoms services, Universal Unwin, UNESCO Chair in ICT4D, “If you haven’t Service Funds (USFs) have been established got basic access to the internet, you’re not even globally to subsidise services, financed through going to get off square one.” contributions from telecoms providers as a share of total revenues.116 In the United States, Expanding connectivity to all means building for example, the contribution of telecom the infrastructure required to allow everyone, providers to the fund was approximately 5.7% regardless of their geographic location, gender, of revenues in 2000, and has climbed to 33.4% income, etc. to have access to the internet. in 2021, with a quarterly budget of US$2.4 This means overcoming barriers to investment, billion.117 While historically the focus of USFs and also overcoming infrastructural challenges has been to target underserved, high-cost related to connecting schools. areas to connect everyone to the telephone But connectivity alone is not enough. While network, their remit has broadened to cover we might be able to overcome infrastructural the digital equivalent of the telephone— barriers to enable all schools to get connected, broadband services.118

Connectivity is not something that happens once and then ends. Technology evolves and so infrastructural needs change. This involves recurrent costs. Investment budgets need to account not only for building the infrastructure in the first place, but also for maintaining it. If not, we won’t have the resources for maintaining it and it will ultimately collapse.” Borhene Chakroun, UNESCO Director of the Division for Policies and Lifelong Learning Systems

116 ITU (2013), “Universal Service Fund and Digital Inclusion For All”. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Regulatory-Market/Documents/USF_final-en.pdf 117 Federal Communications Commission. https://www.fcc.gov/general/contribution-factor-quarterly-filings-universal-service-fund-usf- management-support 118 Federal Communications Commission. https://www.fcc.gov/general/universal-service © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 59 Narrowing the educational divide

Building accessible and affordable connectivity has a number of requirements:

• Investment in infrastructure. One of the major reasons for lack of connectivity is the Broadband has had challenges lack of infrastructure. The EIU’s Inclusive accessing investment capital Internet Index shows that, on average, only markets. But, when you can 9.9% of households in low-income countries demonstrate the impact - for have access to the internet, compared with example, on education - then, 99.5% in rich countries.119 This is driven by that provides the missing link. a lack of infrastructure to obtain access in It helps you attract socially the first place, in addition to other barriers conscious investment.” to access such as affordability and speed. Furthermore, according to the ITU, in low- Christopher Yoo, Director at the Center for income countries, the digital divide between Technology, Innovation and Competition at rural and urban areas is significant, with the University of Pennsylvania urban access to the internet and broadband connectivity 2.3 times as high. In Africa, for • Access to electricity. Internet connectivity example, only 28% of households in urban goes hand-in-hand with access to areas had access to the internet at home in electricity without which access to the 2020, but this is still 4.5 times as high as the internet is worthless—as the title of a share in rural areas, which stood at 6.3%.120 recent article published by the Alliance Expanding infrastructure and increasing for Affordable Internet puts it, “without internet coverage across low-income countries energy, the internet is just a black hole.”121 and rural areas will require investment—and securing this will require investors that are According to World Bank data, able and willing to invest. Often, especially approximately 90% of the world’s in lower-income countries, perceptions of population has access to electricity. political or economic risk can create a barrier. But, as with access to connectivity, this Demonstrating the benefits of increased also varies considerably across and investment in school connectivity will play within countries. In sub-Saharan Africa, an important role in attracting investors, only 48% of the population has access, particularly those driven by moral goals. dropping to 32% in rural areas.122

119 The Economist Intelligence Unit (2020a), “The Inclusive Internet Index 2020”. https://theinclusiveinternet.eiu.com/assets/external/downloads/3i- executive-summary.pdf 120 International Telecommunication Union (2020), “Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2020”. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/FactsFigures2020.pdf 121 Alliance For Affordable Internet (2017), “Without Energy, the Internet Is Just a Black Hole: Creating Energy Solutions for Information and Communications Technology”. https://a4ai.org/without-energy-the-internet-is-just-a-black-hole-creating-energy-solutions-for-information-and- communications-technology/ 122 World Bank data. Available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.ELC.ACCS.ZS © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 60 Narrowing the educational divide

Furthermore, while the statistics may Data shows significant variance in internet suggest that quite a significant share of the broadband speeds at the global level. global population has access to electricity, The Speedtest Global Index, for example, often this is inadequate and unreliable. ranks Singapore the highest, with an Research by the World Bank finds that, in internet speed of 240 Mbps. At the other many countries including Burundi, Ghana, end of the spectrum, the average speed 125 Liberia and Nigeria, more than half of in Turkmenistan falls below 3 Mbps. households connected to an electricity This highlights the need for investment supply have power less than 50% of the not only in providing connectivity in the time.123 Brownouts and blackouts are first place, but in ensuring that it is of high common, not only in developing countries quality. Research by the Boston Consulting but also in the developed world. Group suggests that, with investment of US$2.1 trillion and collaboration between Expanding access to reliable electricity the public and private sectors, access to is therefore a necessary precondition high-speed internet could increase globally for expanding access to the internet. from 53% today to 80% by 2025.126

• High-speed broadband connectivity. • Affordable pricing. Connectivity for In addition to internet access, internet all will remain a dream rather than the speed matters—low-speed internet is far reality if connectivity is available but less beneficial to children than high-speed unaffordable. High taxes on telecoms internet. Statistics on school connectivity can providers are often passed on to consumers therefore be misleading. In many developed in the form of higher prices. Research by countries, school connectivity levels are high Deloitte for GSMA estimates that mobile and close to 100%, but this masks differences operators in 19 countries paid at least a combined US$13.5 billion in taxes.127 in the speed and quality of connectivity and In his report, Darrell West, Director of the extent to which it is used by students the Center of Technology Innovation at in schools rather than for administrative Brookings, refers to these as “connectivity purposes. As discussed in section 5, although taxes” which discourage internet access, 99% of US schools are connected to fibre particularly in underserved areas.128 infrastructure to access the internet, the internet speed measured by the bandwidth ITU research shows that average prices for per student varies substantially across states, broadband packages are very similar across from between 237 Kbps to almost 2,980 levels of development and regions. However, Kbps, with a national average of 676 Kbps.124 due to the disparities in purchasing power,

123 Blimpo, M. and Cosgrove-Davies, M. (2019), “Electricity access in Sub-Saharan Africa”, African Development Forum. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/837061552325989473/pdf/135194-PUB-PUBLIC-9781464813610.pdf 124 EducationSuperHighway (2019). https://stateofthestates.educationsuperhighway.org/?postalCd=AL#state 125 Speedtest Global Index 2021. https://www.speedtest.net/global-index 126 Rastogi, V. et al (2020), “A $2 Trillion Plan to Bring Two Billion More People into the Digital Age”. https://www.bcg.com/en-in/publications/2020/plan- to-bring-high-speed-internet-access-to-two-billion-people 127 GSMA (2014), “Mobile taxes and fees: A toolkit of principles and evidence”. https://www.gsma.com/publicpolicy/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/ GSMA2014_Report_MobileTaxesAndFees-AToolkitOfPrinciplesAndEvidence-1.pdf 128 West, D. (2015), “Digital divide: Improving Internet access in the developing world through affordable services and diverse content”, Center for Technology Innovation at Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/West_Internet-Access.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 61 Narrowing the educational divide

internet access remains too expensive E-rate programme, as it is known, resulted for many in the developing world.129 In in an increase in internet connectivity across 2019, for example, broadband services schools from 14% when it was launched to cost the equivalent of 0.8% of GNI per almost 100% today.132 A study conducted on capita in developed countries, compared beneficiaries of the programme found that a with 5.5% in developing countries, and 1% drop in price contributed to an increase 12.1% in the least-developed countries. In in demand for internet services by 0.4–1.1%. 2018, the UN Broadband Commission for Overall, by the final year of the sample, there Sustainable Development set a target to were approximately 68% more internet- reduce costs of basic broadband services connected classrooms per teacher than there to less than 2% of monthly GNI per capita would have been without the subsidy.133 in developing countries by 2025.130 • Multiple access points: COVID-19 Different stakeholders, including telecoms has highlighted the need for access to operators, regulators and the government, connectivity not only through schools, have a role to play in achieving fair and but through multiple points including affordable telecoms pricing for consumers homes, communities, libraries and other while at the same time advocating for public spaces. In fact, it has highlighted advanced internet and broadband the potential to further intensify the infrastructure.131 Regulation of the digital divide if children are reliant only telecoms sector can also be effective in on connectivity through their schools. As increasing competition and driving cost discussed above, this is illustrated by the efficiencies through market mechanisms. homework gap in the United States which In an effort to eradicate the digital divide, was exposed by the pandemic—across the US government enacted a major subsidy the country, at least 25% of children live for internet infrastructure investment in in a household without internet access schools and libraries from 1998, which or access to a device to connect to the subsidised internet spending by 20–90% internet, denying them the tools to fully depending on school-specific criteria. The leverage available learning resources.134

129 International Telecommunication Union (2020), “Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2020”. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/FactsFigures2020.pdf 130 Ibid. 131 International Telecommunication Union. https://www.itu.int/en/mediacentre/backgrounders/Pages/affordability.aspx 132 Federal Communications Commission. https://www.fcc.gov/general/universal-service-program-schools-and-libraries-e-rate 133 Goolsbee, A. and Guryan, J. (2006), “The Impact of Internet Subsidies in Public Schools”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(2):336-347, February 2006. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/24096057_The_Impact_of_Internet_Subsidies_in_Public_Schools 134 National Education Association (2020), “The Digital Divide and Homework Gap in Your State”. https://www.nea.org/resource-library/digital-divide-and-homework-gap-your-state © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 62 Narrowing the educational divide

3. Embedding technology in education

Having access to the internet in schools is one The lesson that I’ve learnt is thing, but using it—and using it effectively— that the most important thing in education is another thing entirely. If the internet is not properly integrated into the is for teachers to be trained in learning curricula for children, then at best the appropriate and wise use it does nothing, and at worst it creates a of technology. It’s bizarre that distraction and hinders learning. To integrate it people are kitting out schools properly, a number of things need to happen: with access to the internet, but first, teachers need to know how to use the not teacher training colleges.” technology; second, there not only needs to be the infrastructure for the internet but also Tim Unwin, UNESCO Chair in ICT4D the means to access it; and third, curricula design needs to integrate digital learning using relevant local, localised and global content. can be used to support them in teaching students. Perhaps more importantly, they • Teacher training programmes. The need to understand the value of using the core purpose of the use of the internet in internet in order to overcome resistance. education is to support and enhance the While the COVID-19 pandemic has role of teachers and educators in providing accelerated the adoption of technology by education. If teachers are unable to use the teachers by necessitating a shift to remote technology, how can they: (a) teach their learning, a formal and strategic approach to students to use it, and (b) use it to teach their teacher training is needed to fully embrace students? Therefore, the top priority should the benefits of the use of technology in be to “train the trainers”. Teachers need to their practice through the adoption of know how to use the internet and how it blended learning pedagogical approaches.

There’s an old myth that: if you build it, they will come. It’s just not true. Frankly, just building infrastructure for the internet is not enough. Telecom providers and regulators like to focus on building things, but they also need to focus on helping users make better use of their connectivity through programs that teach digital literacy and security.” Christopher Yoo, Director at the Center for Technology, Innovation and Competition at the University of Pennsylvania

Without upskilling teachers, exploiting the to overcome resistance from teachers, use of the internet in education programmes encouraging schools to adopt ICT solutions becomes impossible. A survey of secondary while at the same time training teachers to schools in Sheffield in the United Kingdom encourage the use of the technology.139 found that nearly 85% of teachers acquired their internet skills informally through • Access to hardware. In addition to having self-learning or from colleagues.135 Teacher access to the internet, schools also need to training colleges play a role in updating be equipped with the tools and devices to programmes to incorporate digital be able to use it, such as laptops or desktop education. Evidence has demonstrated that computers. The cost of these devices, the benefits of technology in education however, often acts as a barrier. In many increase manifold when combined with countries, a luxury tax is levied on laptops teacher training. A study by Kho et al. (2018) and other ICT devices which restricts access, in Peru showed that connecting schools particularly to the lowest-income groups. In to the internet had minimal impacts on India, for example, a goods and service tax student performance, but once combined of 18% is levied on computers, laptops and with hiring teachers with computer training, mobile phones,140 while other educational 136 the benefits improved significantly. tools such as books are exempt.141

Training teachers also means overcoming The government plays a key policymaking their resistance in the use of the internet. role in enhancing the affordability of Resistance may be due to many reasons. hardware to complement the expansion Many teachers are not convinced of the of school connectivity. But cutting taxes value that the internet can bring to support is politically challenging, with the need learning, or believe that traditional methods to maintain fiscal revenues while still of learning are the most effective. The fear of encouraging the purchase of laptops and loss of control of the classroom—or worse, of replacement by technology—is also telecoms devices. In 2017, the Colombian commonly cited as a concern.137 However, government’s solution to this dilemma was to evidence from around the world has shown remove the 16% value-added tax (VAT) levied that the introduction of new technologies can on low-cost handsets and laptops, and to in fact enhance the role of teachers and make make up for the loss of revenue by increasing them even more central. What is more likely VAT rates from 16% to 19% for certain is, instead of being replaced by technology, digital products and services, including teachers who resist being replaced by over-the-top services such as Uber and those who embrace it.138 The Pratham Netflix. As a result, both the sale of devices programme in India acknowledges the need and the use of the internet increased.142

135 Madden, A. et al (2005), “Using the Internet in teaching: The views of practitioners (A survey of the views of secondary school teachers in Sheffield, UK)”, British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2):255 - 280, February 2005. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229733149_Using_the_ Internet_in_teaching_The_views_of_practitioners_A_survey_of_the_views_of_secondary_school_teachers_in_Sheffield_UK 136 Kho, K. et al. (2018), “Impact of Internet Access on Student Learning in Peruvian Schools”. Michigan State University, International Food Policy Research Institute. http://econ.msu.edu/repec/wp/Draft04-08-18.pdf 137 Abraham, O. and Reginald, A. (2016), “E-education: Changing the Mindsets of Resistant and Saboteur Teachers”, Journal of Education and Practice, ISSN 2222-1735, Vol.7, No.16, 2016. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234639072.pdf 138 Trucano, M. (2015), “Will technology replace teachers? No, but …”. https://blogs.worldbank.org/edutech/tech-and-teachers 139 Deloitte (2014), “Value of connectivity: Economic and social benefits of expanding internet access”. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/ Deloitte/ie/Documents/TechnologyMediaCommunications/2014_uk_tmt_value_of_connectivity_deloitte_ireland.pdf 140 https://cleartax.in/s/gst-on-laptops/ 141 https://cleartax.in/s/exemptions-gst-goods 142 Alliance For Affordable Internet. https://a4ai.org/studies/eliminating-luxury-taxation-on-ict-essentials/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 64 Narrowing the educational divide

• Reimagining learning curricula. In that, in response to the programme, the two addition to having teachers who are able main publishers of textbooks in the country, to use the internet, and devices on which with near 90% of the market share, switched the internet can be accessed, learning to investing in online platforms and making curricula themselves need to evolve to their content accessible to all students. incorporate the use of the internet and digital content in the most effective way. As well as relevant digital content, there also needs to be a mechanism to disseminate this content to schools, teachers and students in an efficient manner. With the plethora of available online content, We don’t want developing countries from Open Educational Resources (OERs) to become consumers of the global to MOOCs and others, the burden falls supermarket - it’s not just about onto teachers to determine the most importing educational resources. appropriate. While a degree of autonomy The local market needs to be taken allowing teachers to design programmes into account. We can use this as should be retained, ministries of education an opportunity to nurture a local can play a supportive role by guiding the ecosystem to develop platforms and overall direction of education and the content tailored to the local needs.” relevant material for teachers to access.

Borhene Chakroun, UNESCO Director of the Division for Policies and Lifelong Learning Systems

Evolving learning curricula requires relevant and appropriate content which is local, Every teacher is reinventing the localised and global. This might mean, wheel and generating their own for example, producing content in local languages or which teaches the local history material and content. We can and culture. A huge amount of educational do better than this. We need to content already exists on the internet, reimagine the entire curriculum but much of this is contextualised for, and in light of connectivity. It’s not produced in, the developed world where just about one-to-one replacement connectivity is more advanced. Producing of textbooks with online home-grown localised content also provides material - we need to change an opportunity to grow the local ecosystem, the way we teach entirely.” bringing together technology start-ups to build platforms and educators to produce Christopher Yoo, Director at the Center for content.143 Mario Franco, Programme Technology, Innovation and Competition Manager for eEscola in Portugal, reflects at the University of Pennsylvania

143 Kende, M. and Rose, K. (2015), “Promoting Local Content Hosting to Develop the Internet Ecosystem”, Internet Society. https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2015/promoting-local-content-hosting-to-develop-the-internet-ecosystem/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 65 Narrowing the educational divide

4. Protecting children online Internet Use at 14.2% for high school boys and at 10.1% for high school girls, with associated The expansion of internet access is physical and mental health consequences.145 not without its risks, and in the case of children, these risks are all the more In many ways, the risks to children from using concerning. While the internet opens up the internet creates warranted resistance new opportunities for children in their to the adoption of its use even where it is social and mental development, it sadly available. To support adoption and reap the also opens new doors for exploitation benefits, these risks therefore need to be and abuse. Risks to children through the internet can take many forms, ranging addressed and managed: from access to harmful or inappropriate • Regulation. Policies to regulate online content, to sexual abuse by individual content and the use of data can help perpetrators, and to the manipulation of data for commercial gain by corporates. minimise the risks to children and the exploitation of their data by corporates. The As use of the internet is becoming increasingly EIU’s Out of the Shadows Index explores the widespread, the risks are becoming increasingly response to child sexual abuse and online apparent. A survey conducted in Argentina by exploitation across a number of dimensions. Global Kids Online found that at least 75% of With regard to online violence it assesses children surveyed noted that something had the adoption of legislation to facilitate the happened to them online that was upsetting over the past year, including racism, sexual detection of violence and protect children— abuse, and impersonation.144 Another survey on this measure, 25 of the 60 countries published in the journal Psychiatry Research assessed received a score of 0, implying no estimated the prevalence of Problematic clear legislation to protect children online.146

We need to teach children how to protect themselves (online). And at the same time, we need to deal with the perpetrators of (online crimes).” Tim Unwin, UNESCO Chair in ICT4D

144 Livingstone, S. and Stoilova, M. (2016), “How do children use the internet? We asked thousands of kids around the world”. https://theconversation.com/how-do-children-use-the-internet-we-asked-thousands-of-kids-around-the-world-67940 145 Vigna-Taglianti, F. et al (2017), “Problematic internet use among high school students: Prevalence, associated factors and gender differences”, Psychiatry Research 257 (2017) 163-171. https://sci-hub.st/10.1016/j.psychres.2017.07.039 146 The Economist Intelligence Unit. https://outoftheshadows.eiu.com/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 66 Narrowing the educational divide

Where they have been applied, regulation reduce the benefits.149 An alternative approaches have tended to focus on approach to banning content entirely filtering or blocking of content. While this is to educate children in the safe use is not entirely effective in removing all of the internet, and here schools and exploitative content, it can significantly parents can play a significant role. This minimise children’s exposure.147 could include teaching children who to interact with online, when and where it Many online crimes are global in nature and is appropriate to share information, and hence require global coordination in policy how to avoid predators and scammers. approaches. This can make regulation for child protection challenging as countries As schools become increasingly digitised, take different approaches to their legislation a core component of teachers’ evolving on child abuse. A 2012 OECD report, The roles needs to involve a focus on building Protection of Children Online, called for digital skills. This means not only how to a coordinated international response to use the internet, but also how to use it protect children in their use of the internet. safely. Particularly for more vulnerable The Agenda 2030 for Children: End Violence younger children, parents can manage the Solutions Summit, held in Stockholm sites visited and the amount of time spent in 2018, marked signs of progress with online.150 However, this can also impede the leaders from 75 countries coming together opportunities available to children, hence to focus on ending violence—including striking a balance between managing risks online violence—against children.148 and maintaining opportunities is important. • Safety in internet usage. While regulation For older children, a more empowering reduces risks to children on the internet, approach could be used to equip them with it can also be counterproductive and the ability to recognise and avoid online risks.

147 Internet Society, “Children and the Internet”. https://www.internetsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/bp-childrenandtheinternet-20129017-en.pdf 148 The Economist Intelligence Unit. https://outoftheshadows.eiu.com/in-a-free-hour-when-our-power-of-choice-is-untrammelled-and-when- nothing-prevents-our-being-able-to-do-what-we-like-best-every-pleasure-is-to-be-welcomed/ 149 Internet Society, “Children and the Internet”. https://www.internetsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/bp-childrenandtheinternet-20129017-en.pdf 150 UNICEF (2019), “Growing up in a connected world”. https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/GKO%20Summary%20Report.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 67 Narrowing the educational divide

Appendix A: Country profiles Brazil Connectivity in schools151 School connectivity: 3.7 (out of 7)

Student learning outcomes152 Economic profile153 Average years of schooling (2020): 11.9 GDP (2020): US$2,260 billion Learning-adjusted average GDP per capita (2020): US$10,660 years of schooling (2020): 7.9

Brazil is a developing country, the 12th largest strategies for introducing computers into globally in 2020 by nominal GDP, and the 8th high school education also began to be largest by real GDP.154 However, in terms of developed. In the 1980s, a number of GDP per capita, it ranks 52nd in the world, programmes were developed at the national demonstrating a large income divide within level, driven by the federal government the population. Brazil also ranked only 84th and the Ministry of Education.157 out of 189 countries on the United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP’s) Human However, despite developments in the Development Index in 2019.155 Improvements policy environment to support the use of in education hold significant potential to ICT in education, uptake was limited and increase equity in income and stimulate the number of internet users in the country economic growth in Brazil. Currently, Brazil remained low throughout the 1990s and scores only 2.6 out of 7 in terms of the early 2000s, at 0.01–5 users per 100 people quality of its education system in the Global according to EIU data. Programmes which Competitiveness Index.156 While children delivered only ICT infrastructure to schools, receive, on average, almost 12 years of such as Um Computador por Aluno (One education, adjusted for the quality of education, Computer per Student), proved ineffective this is equivalent to only 8 years of schooling. and had a neutral or, in some cases, even a negative effect on student grades.158 Brazil was one of the early adopters of ICT in education, beginning in the In 2008, a series of programmes were launched 1970s. Software such as Computer Aid which focused on the expansion of broadband Instruction was developed in 1974, and internet. At the same time, the School

151 World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2020 152 World Bank Human Capital Index. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/human-capital 153 EIU. 154 EIU data. 155 UNDP Human Development Reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI 156 World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2020 157 Valente, J. A. and Almeida, M. E. B. (2020), “Brazilian Technology Policies in Education: History and Lessons Learned”, education policy analysis archives (epaa), Volume 28 Number 94, June 22 2020, ISSN 1068-2341. https://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/download/4295/2461 158 Henriksen, A. et al (2019), “Education outcomes of broadband expansion in Brazilian municipalities”. https://econpolrg.files.wordpress.com/2019/12/s1.4-paper-broadband-final.pdf

Broadband Program (Programa Banda Larga them, while 24.3% cited not having the nas Escolas) was implemented to connect all technical ability to use the internet.164 urban public schools to the infrastructure that was being developed.159 It aimed to connect In the context of school connectivity, a over 64,000 schools and provide free service number of challenges prevent the adoption of up to 2025. An evaluation of the programme technology. In 2019, based on the latest annual conducted by Badaysan et al. (2014) found survey of ICT use in Brazilian schools, 64% that participating schools performed better of private schools in urban areas used virtual than non-participants in Portugese and maths learning platforms, compared with only 14% of tests and that the benefits grew over time.160 urban public schools. Insufficient computers was most commonly cited by teachers as a Other policies and programmes to tackle barrier to ICT use and, for 70% of teachers connectivity challenges included the 2010 in urban schools, low connection speeds National Broadband Plan (Plano Nacional de also strongly hindered ICT use. Furthermore, Banda Larga) which rolled out an affordable while internet access is available in urban 25,000-kilometre broadband network schools, it is not always made available to extending to less-developed municipalities,161 students. In private schools, for example, only and the 2017 Connected Education Innovation 49% of schools with WiFi made it available Policy to provide universal access to high- to students. In rural schools, 40% were speed internet in education.162 Around this highlighted as having at least one computer time, the number of internet users in Brazil with internet access. However, the scope of use saw a marked increase from 2.9 per 100 of a single computer is limited, and less than people in 2000 to 33.8 per 100 by 2008, and 2% of these schools had a broadband speed reaching almost 75 per 100 by 2020.163 faster than 11 Mbps. The biggest challenge in rural areas was noted as being the lack of Despite the growth in the number of internet infrastructure in the region and/or the school.165 users in Brazil, digital exclusion remains a challenge. According to a survey conducted To bridge this digital gap, in 2019, the plenary by the Brazilian Institute of Geography of the Câmara dos Deputados approved and Statistics in 2018, approximately a Bill authorising the use of part of the 46 million citizens did not have internet Telecommunications Universalization Fund to access—25.4% of respondents noted expand school connectivity in urban and rural that the high price of services excluded public schools.166 The aim is to provide access

159 Ibid. 160 Badaysan, N. et al. (2014), “The Impact of Brazil’s ‘Broadband at School Program’ on Student Achievement”, 2014 TPRC Conference Paper. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2413976 161 World Bank, “Broadband in Brazil”. https://ddtoolkits.worldbankgroup.org/broadband-strategies/case-studies/broadband-brazil 162 “Broadband access project to benefit nearly 13 million students”. http://www.brazil.gov.br/about-brazil/news/2017/11/broadband-access-project-to- benefit-nearly-13-million-students 163 EIU data. 164 Mari, A. (2020), “Digital exclusion still a reality for millions of Brazilians”. https://www.zdnet.com/article/digital-exclusion-still-a-reality-for-millions- of-brazilians/ 165 Brazillian Internet Steering Committee (2019), “Executive Summary: ICT in Education Survey 2019”. https://www.cetic.br/media/docs/ publicacoes/1/20201123093020/executive_summary_ict_education_2019.pdf 166 “House approves use of fund to expand broadband in schools”. https://olhardigital.com.br/en/2019/12/10/noticias/camara-aprova-uso-de-fundo-para- ampliar-banda-larga-em-escolas/?gfetch=2019%2F12%2F10%2Fnews%2Fcamara-approves-use-of-fund-to-expand-broadband-in-schools%2F 167 “Broadband access project to benefit nearly 13 million students”. http://www.brazil.gov.br/about-brazil/news/2017/11/broadband-access-project- to-benefit-nearly-13-million-students © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 69 Narrowing the educational divide

Brazil: Potential economic gains from improved schoolBrazil: Potential connectivity economic gains 2020–30 from improved school connectivity - Real GDP (US$ billions) Real GDP (US$ billions)

Baseline Scenario : Rwanda Scenario : South Korea Scenario : Finland

+.%

Source: EIU analysis Note: The scenarios assess the potential economic impacts of increasing school connectivity levels to match a reference country

El Salvador Connectivity in schools168 School connectivity: 3.2 (out of 7)

Student learning outcomes169 Economic profile170 Average years of schooling (2020): 10.9 GDP (2020): US$21.3 billion Learning-adjusted average GDP per capita (2020): US$3,290 years of schooling (2020): 7.6

El Salvador is a small developing country. 2004–09 National Education Plan, for According to EIU estimates, its 2020 real example, identified the use of technologies GDP stood at US$21 billion, with GDP per and the promotion of connectivity as key capita of US$3,290.171 It ranked 124th out priorities for the sector. Subsequently, of 189 countries on the UNDP’s Human under the ambitious Una Niña, Un Niño, Development Index in 2019.172 A significant Una Computadora (One Boy, One Girl, One area for improvement in El Salvador’s Computer) programme, the country aimed human development performance relates to deliver at least 50,000 computers to 2,600 to education—it scores only 2.3 out of 8 in schools by the end of 2015.175 Another major terms of the quality of its education system project in relation to the use of technology 173 in the Global Competitiveness Index. in education was the Conéctate programme Recognising the importance of high-quality which included: Edunet, a project to provide education in the socioeconomic development connectivity across public schools; Mi of the country, the public sector, through the Portal, an online portal for students; and Ministry of Education, has placed emphasis on Computers for Schools, which collected 176 improving the educational system. The primary donations of computers for public schools. area of focus has been in terms of expanding More recently, and partially stimulated by access to education following the end of the the COVID-19 pandemic, the Ministry of country’s civil war in 1992 which destroyed Innovation announced its Digital Agenda for schools and left teachers and children in fear 2020–30, identifying education as one of its of attending those schools that remained.174 four key pillars in addition to digital identity, In the mid-2000s, the use of technology modernisation of the state and e-government. began to become integrated within In collaboration with the Ministry of Education, education strategies. The government’s it has prioritised the digitisation of the

168 World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2020 169 World Bank Human Capital Index. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/human-capital 170 EIU. 171 EIU data. 172 UNDP Human Development Reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI 173 World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2020 174 Excellence and Innovation in Secondary Education (EXITO), Project Information Document, Ministry of Education, El Salvador. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/232171468027569198/pdf/Project0Inform1nt010Appraisal0Stage.pdf 175 Miranda, D. (2015), “Education Reform in El Salvador: Progress and Challenges”. https://www.coha.org/education-reform-in-el-salvador-progress- and-challenges/ 176 Noyola, R. (2007), “Development of the Internet in El Salvador”. https://www.listasal.info/en/internet-in-el-salvador/3-government-projects.shtml © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 71 Narrowing the educational divide

education sector.177 As part of this, a process One key challenge is the lack of internet access has been initiated to train 100 technical in the first place—across urban areas, the specialists who will in turn train 46,000 internet penetration rate in 2019 was 26%, teachers to build capacity in online education. and only 2.6% in rural areas.179 Expanding The programmes implemented in El Salvador connectivity is the starting point for integrating to integrate technology within education the use of the internet in education, hence and improve school connectivity have had highlighting the need for greater investment some impact but there remains significant in infrastructure in the country. At the same scope for improvement—the country’s time, investment in education remains score on the Internet Access in Schools indicator of the Global Competitiveness relatively low—while the government had Index, for example, was 2.6 out of 7 in aimed to increase investment in education 2009, and still only 3.2 by 2017.178 to 6% of GDP, it remains at 3.5%.180

El Salvador: Potential economic gains from improved school connectivity 2020–30 El Salvador: Potential economic gains from improved school connectivity - Real GDP GDP (US$ (US$ billions) billions)

Baseline Scenario : Rwanda Scenario : South Korea Scenario : Finland

. . . +.% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Source: EIU analysis Note: The scenarios assess the potential economic impacts of increasing school connectivity levels to match a reference country

177 Ministry of Education (2020), “MINED works on the digitization of education”. https://www.mined.gob.sv/noticias/item/1015516-mined-trabaja-en-la- digitalizacion-de-la-educacion.html 178 World Bank data. https://tcdata360.worldbank.org/indicators/hbfab20aa?indicator=571&viz=line_chart&years=2007,2017 179 Alliance For Affordable Internet (2020), “Rural broadband policy framework: Connecting the unconnected”. https://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/07/Rural-Broadband-Policy-Framework-Report_A4AI.pdf 180 Miranda, D. (2015), “Education Reform in El Salvador: Progress and Challenges”. https://www.coha.org/education-reform-in-el-salvador-progress-and- challenges/#_edn16 © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 72 Narrowing the educational divide

Kyrgyzstan Connectivity in schools181 School connectivity: 3.6 (out of 7)

Student learning outcomes182 Economic profile183 Average years of schooling (2020): 12.9 GDP (2020): US$6.6 billion Learning-adjusted average GDP per capita (2020): US$1,010 years of schooling (2020): 8.7

Kyrgyzstan is a developing country in A major challenge in Kyrgyzstan is that over Central Asia and the smallest economy in 60% of the population remains disconnected the region with real GDP of US$6.6 billion from the internet. The geographic landscape of in 2020.184 GDP per capita in the country the country is the biggest hurdle in establishing stood at US$1,010 in 2020, compared with internet infrastructure—94% of its area is more an average of US$4,500 across the Central than 1,000 metres above sea level, creating 185 Asia region. On the UNDP’s Human significant challenges and costs in laying Development Index, Kyrgyzstan ranked cables for internet connections.189 Moreover, 186 120th out of 189 countries. It also had since it is landlocked, it relies on neighbouring the weakest performance in the region in countries for access to submarine-cable terms of the quality of its education system, landing stations which adds extra cost. The scoring 3.1 out of 7 on this indicator in cost of international bandwidth in Kyrgyzstan the Global Competitiveness Index.187 is estimated at US$100 per Mbps per month, The country’s performance on quality of which is significantly higher than the cost education is in part a reflection of its access to in Kazakhstan ($4) or Russia ($15).190 school connectivity, where it also lags behind with a score of 3.6 out of 7, compared with a To overcome these challenges to connectivity, regional average of 4.5. To address the lack of particularly in the context of COVID-19 digital connectivity, the Kyrgyz government when all education was moved online, the adopted the Digital Kyrgyzstan 2019–2023 plan Internet Society worked with the Ministry which, among other aims, seeks to improve of Education and international funders to digital infrastructure and internet connectivity deliver an innovative solution—the Ilimbox, across the country, and to enhance digital a digital library storing over 500 books, 250 literacy through training and IT education.188 videos and 4 million Wikipedia articles.191

181 World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2020 182 World Bank Human Capital Index. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/human-capital 183 EIU. 184 EIU data. 185 The Central Asia region includes: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan 186 UNDP Human Development Reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI 187 World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2020 188 US Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration. https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/kyrgyz-republic-information-and- communication-technology-ict 189 Yang, Z. (2021), “Where the internet was delivered by a donkey”. https://restofworld.org/2021/delivering-the-internet-by-donkey/ 190 Coffin, J. et al (2015), “Kyrgyz Internet Environment Assessment”, Internet Society. https://www.internetsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/ Kyrgyzstan_Study.pdf 191 Yang, Z. (2021), “Where the internet was delivered by a donkey”. https://restofworld.org/2021/delivering-the-internet-by-donkey/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 73 Narrowing the educational divide

The box can be used without access to the To this end, the Kyrgyzstan government internet and also provides a local WiFi hotspot has been working closely with UNICEF which children can connect to through their on a blockchain solution to monitor and phones in order to download content. improve connectivity in schools.192 There However, it is recognised that this was only are also plans to upgrade the Ilimbox device a temporary solution to the connectivity (Project Ilimbox 2.0) to make it a smart online challenges in the country in order to manage learning platform that allows teachers to the effects of the pandemic, and a more create content and students to access the long-term solution is yet to be implemented. live rather than pre-loaded content.193

Kyrgyzstan: Potential economic gains from improved school connectivity 2020–30 Kyrgyzstan: Potential economic gains from improved school connectivity - Real GDP GDP (US$ (US$ billions) billions)

Baseline Scenario : Rwanda Scenario : South Korea Scenario : Finland

. . +.% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Source: EIU analysis Note: The scenarios assess the potential economic impacts of increasing school connectivity levels to match a reference country

192 Rodriguez, J. (2019), “UNICEF Plans to Create Blockchain to Improve Internet Connectivity in Kyrgyzstan Schools”. https://ihodl.com/topnews/2019-03-07/unicef-create-blockchain-improve-internet-connectivity-kyrgyzstan-schools/ 193 “Digital transformation in the Kyrgyz Republic”. https://johnsmithtrust.org/digital-transformation-in-the-kyrgyz-republic/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 74 Narrowing the educational divide

Niger Connectivity in schools194 School connectivity: 2.1 (out of 7)

Student learning outcomes195 Economic profile196 Average years of schooling (2020): 5.5 GDP (2020): US$12.7 billion Learning-adjusted average GDP per capita (2020): US$530 years of schooling (2020): 2.7

Niger is a small developing country in Recognising the education crisis in the sub-Saharan Africa with total real GDP of country, the government has prioritised US$12.7 billion in 2020, and GDP per capita spending on education, which currently of US$530, the tenth lowest of any country accounts for 20.7% of the government’s total in the world.197 On the UNDP’s Human budget, and is expected to grow further. Development Index, Niger ranked last out of The Sustainable Development and Inclusive 189 countries.198 It performs particularly poorly Growth Strategy 2035 and Economic and in terms of its average years of schooling of Social Development Plan 2017–21, for example, 5.5 years compared with a world average of emphasise the need for improvements in 11.3 years—after adjusting for the quality of the education sector in order to transform education, the average years of education human capital and support sustained growth. in Niger drops even further to 2.7 years. The focus of education funding in Niger With a rapidly growing population, the is currently on providing basic education education sector in Niger is under immense access, and developing infrastructure and pressure to serve a larger number of students curricula.201 With these more seemingly and to provide enhanced quality of teaching pressing challenges, school connectivity has and learning. As of 2019, there were 500,000 not been a significant priority for policymakers. new students enrolling into primary school— With limited availability of connectivity, either this is expected to double to 1 million students through schools or at home, the education by 2030.199 In addition to the growing demand system responded to the COVID-19 pandemic for education, its provision is challenged by by providing distance learning through security concerns—for example, in 2018, radio for those who could access it, and 30 schools located in the Diffa region were through the distribution of printed written closed as a result of terrorist threats.200 material to children in the most deprived and

194 Source data on school connectivity is not available for Niger and has been estimated by the EIU 195 World Bank Human Capital Index. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/human-capital 196 EIU. 197 EIU data. 198 UNDP Human Development Reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI 199 World Bank, Niger Learning Improvement for Results in Education Project (P168779), Project Information Document. https://ewsdata.rightsindevelopment.org/files/documents/79/WB-P168779.pdf 200 Ibid. 201 World Bank, Niger Learning Improvement for Results in Education Project (P168779), Project Information Document. https://ewsdata.rightsindevelopment.org/files/documents/79/WB-P168779.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 75 Narrowing the educational divide

disadvantaged parts of the country.202 The connectivity—80% of its land is covered by challenges faced by Niger in the wake of the the Sahara Desert.204 Furthermore, more than pandemic highlight the importance of digital 80% of the population live in remote rural connectivity and technological development areas. 205 To overcome this, the government in building a resilient education system. has initiated the Niger 2.0 Smart Village Project which seeks to invest in broadband As one of the least connected countries in infrastructure to provide internet access in the world, with only 15.6% of households rural regions. Alongside this, digital services with internet access compared with 54.7% are being expanded in order to leverage globally,203 there is a growing recognition increased access to the internet and realise of the need to expand connectivity both in the benefits that this can offer—and education general and to support education. Niger’s is one area that has been identified for digital geography creates a substantial barrier to transformation through the programme.206

Niger: Potential economic gains from improved school connectivity 2020–30 Niger: Potential economic gains from improved school connectivity - Real GDP GDP (US$ (US$ billions) billions)

Baseline Scenario : Rwanda Scenario : South Korea Scenario : Finland

. . +.% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Source: EIU analysis Note: The scenarios assess the potential economic impacts of increasing school connectivity levels to match a reference country

202 “Niger: Strengthening the resilience of the education system to limit the effects of COVID-19”. https://www.globalpartnership.org/where-we-work/niger 203 International Telecommunication Union (2018), “Measuring the Information Society Report 2018”, Niger, Volume 2. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/LDCs/Documents/2017/Country%20Profiles/Country%20Profile_Niger.pdf 204 African Development Bank Group. https://www.afdb.org/en/documents/niger-national-climate-change-profile#:~:text=Niger%20covers%20a%20 land%20area,covered%20by%20the%20Sahara%20Desert. 205 “Smart Villages: Empowering rural communities in ‘Niger 2.0’”. https://etradeforall.org/news/smart-villages-empowering-rural-communities-in-niger- 2-0/#:~:text=The%20Republic%20of%20Niger%20is,hard%2Dto%2Dreach%20areas.&text=The%20project%20aims%20to%20improve,Niger%20 through%20improved%20broadband%20infrastructure. 206 Ibid. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 76 Narrowing the educational divide

Sierra Leone Connectivity in schools School connectivity: 2.6 (out of 7)

Student learning outcomes207 Economic profile208 Average years of schooling (2020): 9.6 GDP (2020): US$3.7 billion Learning-adjusted average GDP per capita (2020): US$460 years of schooling (2020): 4.9

Sierra Leone is a small developing country However, lack of connectivity has been in sub-Saharan Africa with total real GDP of a challenge in the uptake of ICT. While US$3.7 billion in 2020 and the fourth lowest internet penetration continues to remain GDP per capita in the world of only US$460.209 low in the country at 30% in 2021 compared It also sits close to the bottom of the UNDP’s with over 50% globally, there has been a Human Development Index, ranking 182 significant rise in recent years—between out of 189 countries.210 While it performs 2019 and 2020, the number of internet relatively well in terms of the average years of users in Sierra Leone grew by 8.1%, with schooling attained by children with an average additional growth of 20% between 2020 of 9.6 years compared with 8.3 across the and 2021.212 To a large extent, this growth wider sub-Saharan Africa region, this drops can be attributed to two developments in to 4.9 years after accounting for quality. 2019: the cable link to neighbouring Guinea and the construction of a 600 kilometre Since the implementation of the National Economic Community of West African Education Policy 2010, ICT has formed a major States (ECOWAS) Wide Area Network.213 component across all levels of education, encouraging the use of technologies to enhance To expand access to education and to extend digital skills and deliver distance education the growth in connectivity in the country to programmes.211 With over 30% of school- the education sector, the government has age children not enrolled in schools in 2010, implemented a flagship project under its one of the priorities of the government was recent Medium-term National Development to provide greater access to basic education Plan (MTNDP) 2019–2023—the Free Quality through the use of digital technologies. School Education Programme (FQSE).214

207 World Bank Human Capital Index. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/human-capital 208 EIU. 209 EIU data. 210 UNDP Human Development Reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI 211 Government of Sierra Leone, Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, “National Education Policy 2010”. https://mbsse.gov.sl/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/2010-National-Education-Policy.pdf 212 https://datareportal.com/digital-in-sierra-leone 212 “Sierra Leone - Telecoms, Mobile and Broadband - Statistics and Analyses”. https://www.budde.com.au/Research/Sierra-Leone-Telecoms-Mobile-and- Broadband-Statistics-and-Analyses 214 International Monetary Fund. https://www.imf.org/~/media/Files/Publications/CR/2020/English/1SLEEA2020002.ashx+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ae © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 77 Narrowing the educational divide

The FQSE seeks to provide free admissions entities are coming forward under the umbrella to all children across public schools, and of Project One Access and Connectivity has resulted in an increase in the number for Schools, which is targeting 500 schools 215 of children enrolled by almost 700,000. with the aim of providing free high-speed However, putting in place the infrastructure to internet. A memorandum of understanding accommodate this growth in enrolment has between Sierra Leone Cable Limited, been slow—only just over half of classrooms Afcom and Niche Technologies further aims are in good condition and a large number have to set up an online school management no access to water and toilets, let alone the platform in 100 schools—it is intended internet, which only 1% of schools have.216 that this platform will provide access to To address the lack of connectivity, private online learning material for teachers.217

Sierra Leone: Potential economic gains from improved school connectivity 2020–30 Sierra Leone: Potential economic gains from improved school connectivity - Real GDP GDP (US$ (US$ billions) billions) Baseline Scenario : Rwanda Scenario : South Korea Scenario : Finland

. . . +.% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Source: EIU analysis Note: The scenarios assess the potential economic impacts of increasing school connectivity levels to match a reference country

215 Thomas, A. (2020), “Free education in Sierra Leone – a lot done, yet much more to do”. https://www.thesierraleonetelegraph.com/free-education-in- sierra-leone-a-lot-done-yet-much-more-to-do/ 216 Ibid. 217 Samba, S., “Enhance strategic aspirations of country’s Education & Health sectors”. https://yame.space/whats-up-africalinks/2019/6/3/500-schools-to-get- free-internet-connections-in-sierra-leone © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 78 Narrowing the educational divide

United States Connectivity in schools218 % of schools with fibre infrastructure (2019): 99% Average bandwidth per student (2019): 676 Kbps

Student learning outcomes219 Economic profile220 Average years of schooling (2020): 12.9 GDP (2020): US$18,100 billion Learning-adjusted average years GDP per capita (2020): US$55,000 of schooling (2020): 10.6

The United States had the highest total school connectivity.225 It offers discounts to real GDP in the world of US$18.1 trillion, schools and libraries in the country of between and among the highest GDP per capita 20% to 90%, depending on eligibility criteria, with a national average of US$55,000 for internet access. All schools that meet the 221 per person. It performs well on the definition of an elementary or secondary school UNDP’s Human Development Index, are eligible, and the total amount that can be 222 ranking 17th out of 189 countries. received is determined by the location of the In terms of education, the United States school—rural areas, for example, receive the ranks highly compared with other countries. highest discount. Funding is provided through On average, children receive 12.9 years of the USF, with a funding cap in 2019 of US$4.15 education (10.6 after adjusting for learning billion earmarked for the E-rate programme. The quality), compared with a global average of 11.3 USF has a broader remit to provide affordable years (7.8 after adjusting for learning quality).223 telecoms services across the healthcare and According to EducationSuperHighway education sectors, with a particular focus (2019), the country has also made significant on areas with low incomes and where these progress in achieving school connectivity. In services are costly to provide.226 When it was 2014, only 25% of classrooms and 4 million first implemented, E-rate’s focus was on basic students had internet access, while by 2019, telecoms and internet services. However, as 99% of schools had access to fibre networks, the telecoms sector has modernised, so too connecting 46.3 million students across the has the programme, which now has a goal to country to digital learning solutions.224 expand not only internet connectivity, but The E-rate programme—implemented by specifically broadband connectivity and WiFi the Federal Communications Commission in access through the E-Rate Modernisation 1996—has played a major role in expanding Orders adopted in 2010 and 2014.227

218 EducationSuperHighway (2019). https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/esh-sots-pdfs/2019%20State%20of%20the%20States.pdf 219 World Bank Human Capital Index. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/human-capital 220 Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA); EIU analysis. 221 Ibid. 222 UNDP Human Development Reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/HDI 223 World Bank Human Capital Index. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/human-capital 224 EducationSuperHighway (2019), “2019 State of the States”. https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/esh-sots-pdfs/2019%20State%20of%20the%20States.pdf 225 Federal Communications Commission. https://www.fcc.gov/general/universal-service-program-schools-and-libraries-e-rate 226 Federal Communications Commission. https://www.fcc.gov/general/universal-service-fund 227 Federal Communications Commission. https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/universal-service-program-schools-and-libraries-e-rate © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 79 Narrowing the educational divide

While the E-rate programme has enabled high-speed, cost-effective internet access.228 universal access to the internet across A further connectivity challenge for students schools in the United States, the quality of in the US is the divide in the availability access in terms of connectivity speed varies of internet access and digital devices at considerably. Although 99% of school districts home—the homework gap. At least 25% have achieved the goal of connecting each of households—particularly low-income student to the internet at a minimum speed households in rural areas—do not have of 100 Kbps, only 38% achieve the 1 Mbps broadband access at home. The Emergency standard set by the Federal Communications Broadband Benefit,229 introduced by the Commission to maximise the benefits of Federal Communications Commission, digital learning—on average, the bandwidth attempts to address this by increasing the per student across the country stood at 676 affordability of internet and device access Kbps in 2019. However, even though the speed for eligible low-income households with of internet connectivity remains low in many a one-time discount of up to US$50 on states, there has been significant progress at broadband service and up to US$100 for the national level. The average internet speed a device such as a laptop. The Emergency available to students has increased almost Connectivity Fund has also secured US$7.1 threefold from 258 Kbps in 2015 to 676 Kbps billion to extend broadband services and in 2019. The latest E-rate modernisation enable remote learning, particularly in order issued in 2014 places an emphasis on response to the COVID-19 pandemic.230

United States: States: Potential Potential economic economic gains from gains improved from internet improved bandwidth internet - bandwidth 2020–30 Real GDP GDP (US$ (US$ billions) billions) Baseline Scenario : National average Scenario : North Dakota

, , , , , +.% , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

, , ,

Source: EIU analysis Note: The scenarios assess the potential economic impacts of increasing broadband bandwidth levels across states to match either the national average or the average in the highest performing state (North Dakota)

228 Federal Communications Commission. https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-continues-e-rate-reboot-meet-nations-digital-learning-needs 229 https://www.fcc.gov/broadbandbenefit 230 https://www.fundsforlearning.com/ecf/#:~:text=Included%20in%20the%20legislation%20is,the%20federal%20E-rate%20program.

Appendix B: Methodology note

Introduction to the model selected countries to estimate the potential implications of improvements in connectivity The EIU has developed an impact model levels. Impacts are assessed for six key to estimate the potential individual-level markets: Brazil, El Salvador, Kyrgyzstan, and societal gains from improving school Niger, Sierra Leone and the United States. connectivity. The model uses a two-step These key markets have been selected on approach to quantify the impacts: the basis of a number of criteria including: • Stage 1—Regression analysis: - Regional representation: Countries In the first stage, we build econometric have been selected to obtain a regional regression models to assess the relationships representation across regions including between the following, based on cross- the Americas (North America, South country data: America, Central America), Central - School connectivity and learning outcomes Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. for schoolchildren - School performance: Across the regions - Learning outcomes for schoolchildren and identified, representative countries economic growth are selected by identifying the worst- performing countries in terms of internet - School connectivity and economic growth access in schools and the quality of (through improved learning outcomes, as education systems based on the World well as other channels of impact) Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness 231 To assess the impacts of not only access Index. These countries were selected to connectivity, but also the quality of for holding the greatest potential connectivity, we build a regression model for improvement in connectivity. to quantify the impact of improvements in - Economic development: In addition to broadband speed for students and economic school performance, a further criterion growth. This final model uses state-level data applied in selecting countries was level in the United States. of economic development as measured The analysis incorporates a series of by UNDP’s Human Development Index. inputs including: advisory interviews with Countries that rank low on the Index academics and experts; a literature review of have the most to gain economically from existing studies on these relationships; and improvements in school connectivity. a data audit of macroeconomic and related - Data availability: A final criterion used indicators to assess these trends. to select countries after applying the • Stage 2—Impact assessment: criteria above is the availability of data to The relationships identified through the perform the analysis. Data requirements econometric analysis are then applied to for the analysis are discussed below.

231 World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2020 © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 81 Narrowing the educational divide

Scenario analysis is used to assess the Index.234 It offers a feasible and attainable implications of improved school connectivity benchmark for other low income countries. in the six key markets identified. - South Korea: South Korea scores the For five of the six key markets—Brazil, El highest on the EIU’s Inclusive Internet Salvador, Kyrgyzstan, Niger and Sierra Index (2020) in terms of its availability Leone—the analysis compares educational of internet connectivity nationally. It and economic outcomes in each country therefore offers a benchmark of global under a baseline which assumes no change best practice for other countries.235 in school connectivity levels, relative to alternative scenarios of higher levels of For the United States, the analysis connectivity. The scenarios are developed explores the potential impact on GDP based on current connectivity levels in of improving the speed of broadband three reference countries: Finland, Rwanda connectivity available to students. Two and South Korea. These countries are scenarios are considered including: selected as benchmark countries for the analysis for the following reasons: - National average: This scenario explores the state-level implications - Finland: Finland ranks third in the World of improving broadband speed to Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness match the national average. Index in terms of the quality of its education system (after Switzerland - Benchmark state: The second scenario and Singapore) and has among the assesses the state-level implications of highest levels of access to the internet improving broadband speed to match the in schools.233 There is a concerted best-performing state in the country in effort in the country to improve school terms of broadband speed—North Dakota. connectivity through government and The analysis provides novel insights for community projects to enable free access policymakers, education providers and to the internet and to bring high-speed telecoms service providers. By quantifying fibre-optic broadband to remote areas. the implications of school connectivity and - Rwanda: Across low income countries, speed at both the micro level of individual Rwanda scores the highest in terms of both learners and the macro level of the wider internet access in schools and the quality of economy, the analysis seeks to incentivise the education system based on the World coordinated action across all levels to Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness overcome barriers to improved connectivity.

232 UNDP Human Development Reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi 233 World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2020 234 Ibid. 235 The Economist Intelligence Unit. https://theinclusiveinternet.eiu.com/ © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 82 Narrowing the educational divide

Regression analysis

Model framework

In the first stage of the analysis, we use econometric approaches to assess the relationships between school connectivity/ broadband speed and economic growth. These impacts work through complex channels which link school connectivity to economic growth in two ways:

• Through individual benefits: School connectivity brings direct benefits to individual students, improving their learning outcomes and opportunities in higher education and in the labour market. Over the long run, these benefits also stimulate economic impacts through productivity improvements, thus enabling technological progress.

• Through community development: In addition to the socioeconomic benefits through the education system, improved school connectivity can facilitate wider community connectivity. This can generate additional socioeconomic impacts through community development and by facilitating increased economic activity—for example, by enabling digital marketplaces.

Pathway of impact: From connectivity to growth Pathway of impact: From connectivity to growth

Direct benefits (benefits to individual) Indirect benefits (wider socioeconomic benefits)

Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

Input quantity Input quality Technological progress

Enablement of Increased demand Increased access to technological for goods and Increased labour highly skilled development services, requiring productivity from employees in the through increased labour force improved skills and labour force education digital acumen in expansion the labour force

Improved income

Improved education performance

Improved quality Improved access Improved digital of education to resources literacy skills

Improved school internet connectivity

Source: EIU research

The pathways through which school 2. Relationship between learning outcomes connectivity can stimulate socioeconomic and economic growth: The second development are complex and interlinked. By model assesses the relationship assessing each pathway individually, there is a between changes in learning outcomes risk of: (a) double-counting some of the impacts and GDP. Models 1 and 2 combined which operate in an interrelated way; and/or (b) provide an assessment of the impact omitting specific channels of impact. In order to of school connectivity on GDP through overcome this challenge, our approach assesses improvements in learning outcomes. the overall impact of school connectivity on economic growth (reflected in GDP) 3. Relationship between school connectivity without disaggregating the different channels and economic growth: While models 1 through which this is derived. These channels and 2 explore the link between school are assessed qualitatively in our report. connectivity and economic performance through learning outcomes, we use To assess the relationship between school model 3 to assess other channels through connectivity and economic growth, we which school connectivity can stimulate have built three separate regression economic growth beyond education. models which capture the following: We explore a fourth relationship specifically 1. Relationship between school connectivity in the context of the United States: and learning outcomes: The first model considers the impact of changes in school 4. Relationship between broadband speed and connectivity on the outcomes for students economic growth: The fourth model uses in an educational setting. The purpose of US-specific data to assess the link between this model is to identify the individual- higher broadband speeds for students level impacts of school connectivity. and economic growth at the state level.

Simpliﬁed model framework Simplified model framework

Direct benefits (benefits to individual) Indirect benefits (wider socioeconomic benefits) Channels captured through EIU model

Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

Input quantity Input quality Technological progress

Improved income Improved quality of Improved employability life

Improved opportunities in secondary/tertiary education

Improved education performance

Improved quality Improved access Improved digital of education to resources literacy skills

Improved school internet connectivity

Source: EIU research

For each of the models described above (with • Cross-country approach: This approach the exception of model 4) we have built a cross- considers changes in school connectivity country model to identify relationships. We and economic performance between use a similar approach to that taken in Deloitte countries at a particular point in time. It is (2016) to assess the impacts of improvements simpler than the panel data approach as it in the quality of education on future wages and employment for individuals.236 For each does not account for changes over time in model, two separate modelling approaches the variables, but relies to a greater extent have been tested to identify the best fit: on actual data with fewer data gaps. In its most basic form, the model assumes the • Panel approach: This approach considers changes in school connectivity and following relationship between variables: economic performance between and within countries over time. While it allows us to assess variation both across countries and Where is yithe = variable αyi0 + βXiof interest + ϵi time, gaps in the availability of time-series for country i (for example, learning data limits the robustness of the analysis. In yi outcomes or economic growth), its most basic form, the model assumes the is the intercept and is a vector of following relationship between variables: αyi0 controls (including school connectivity). Xi

Both approaches are separate attempts Where yit=αiis the variable+ βXit + of γt interest + ϵit (for to estimate the relationships identified example, learning outcomes or economic yit above. The final results are based on the growth) for country i at time t, is a country-specific intercept, is a vector first approach which is the preferred αi of controls (including school connectivity), one as it takes into account variation Xit and is a time-period-specific intercept. both across countries and over time.

γt

236 Deloitte (2016), “The economic impact of improving school quality”. https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/ecoimpactschoolquality.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 87 Narrowing the educational divide

The specific forms of the panel and cross- The remainder of this section outlines the country models for each regression are regressions run for each model, the data discussed below. In both cases, data is used and the results from the analysis. obtained across countries for the analysis. Based on data availability, the following 100+ countries are used in the models:237

Albania Canada Finland Japan Montenegro Russia Trinidad & Tobago

Algeria Chad France Jordan Morocco Saudi Arabia Tunisia

Argentina Chile Gambia Kazakhstan Namibia Senegal Turkey

Australia Colombia Georgia Kuwait Netherlands Serbia Uganda

Austria Congo Germany Latvia New Zealand Seychelles Ukraine

Azerbaijan Costa Rica Greece Lesotho North Singapore United Arab Macedonia Emirates

Bahrain Côte D’Ivoire Guatemala Lithuania Norway Slovakia United Kingdom

Belgium Croatia Hong Kong Luxembourg Oman Slovenia United States

Benin Cyprus Hungary Madagascar Panama South Africa Uruguay

Botswana Czech Iceland Malawi Paraguay South Korea Vietnam Republic

Brazil Denmark Indonesia Malaysia Peru Spain Zimbabwe

Bulgaria Ecuador Iran Malta Poland Sweden

Burkina Faso Egypt Ireland Mauritius Portugal Switzerland

Burundi Estonia Israel Mexico Qatar Thailand

Cameroon Eswatini Italy Moldova Romania Timor-Leste

237 The specific countries used in each model specification may vary depending on the availability of relevant data. © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 88 Narrowing the educational divide

Model 1: School connectivity • Internet Access in Schools Index: This and learning outcomes This measure is a sub-index in the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness The first model assesses the association Index.241 It is designed to capture the between school connectivity degree to which the internet is used in the and learning outcomes under the delivery of education across countries. hypothesis that improvements in school Each country is scored on a scale from 1 to connectivity have a significant impact 7. This measure directly relates to school on learning outcomes for students. connectivity, but since it is based on an Our key variable of interest in this model index the interpretation of regression is the learning outcomes for students and analysis using this as a measure is less understanding the factors that drive it. In meaningful from a policy perspective. measuring learning outcomes for students Analysis findings would suggest a relationship as a proxy for educational quality, a number between changes in performance on of alternative measures could be considered. the index and learning outcomes but Previous empirical studies have used with no clear policy implications for internationally comparable assessment scores how to improve performance. such as PISA language, science and maths scores.238,239 However, national standardised • Broadband subscriptions: An alternative testing varies across countries and across proxy measure of school connectivity the time periods of assessment. Hence, for tested in the models is the number of the purposes of this analysis, which requires broadband subscriptions per 100 people in cross-country time-series data, test scores the population from the ITU.242 Unlike the are not used as a measure of quality. Instead, previous measure, this indicator captures we have learning-adjusted years of schooling internet connectivity more broadly, 240 as our measure of learning outcomes. This rather than specifically through schools. measure, developed by the World Bank, adjusts However, there is a close correlation the average number of years of schooling in between broadband subscriptions and each country by the quality of the education performance on the Internet Access in delivered to provide an internationally Schools Index, suggesting that broadband comparable measure of education quality. subscriptions could be a reasonable Alternative measures have been used proxy indicator for school connectivity. It and tested to capture levels of school would be expected that general levels of connectivity in assessing the extent to which internet connectivity in a country would be it drives learning outcomes, including: closely related with school connectivity.

238 Hanushek, E. and Woessmann, L. (2010), “Education and economic growth”. http://hanushek.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/ Hanushek%2BWoessmann%202010%20IntEncEduc%202.pdf 239 Deloitte (2016), “The economic impact of improving school quality”. https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/ecoimpactschoolquality.pdf 240 Angrist, N. et al. (2018), “Learning-Adjusted Years of Schooling (LAYS)”, World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper 8591. http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/243261538075151093/pdf/WPS8591.pdf 241 World Bank data. https://tcdata360.worldbank.org/indicators/hbfab20aa?country=BRA&indicator=571&viz=line_chart&years=2007,2017 242 International Communications Union. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 89 Narrowing the educational divide

Our final model results use the Internet • Regional dummy variables (to capture Access in Schools Index as the measure regional effects on learning outcomes) of school connectivity on the basis that it is more directly linked to the hypothesis • Interaction variables between income being tested—namely the impact of school levels and school connectivity (to assess connectivity on learning outcomes and GDP. any differences in the impact of school connectivity on learning outcomes between In addition to school connectivity, we low , middle- and high-income countries) include a number of controls in the model to capture other factors which could The findings from the regression analysis influence learning outcomes for students: are shown in the table below. We present • Government expenditure on education, as a the findings from our preferred model percentage of GDP (based on UNESCO data) specification under three variations: time- only fixed effects; country-only fixed • Average years of schooling effects; and time and country fixed effects. (based on UNDP data) Using a Lagrange Multiplier test of these • Time fixed effects (to capture time- three variations, our preferred model is specific effects on learning outcomes) the country-only fixed effects variation.

Model 1 results: School connectivity and learning outcomes

Dependent variable: Learning-adjusted years of schooling (ln)

1.1. Time fixed 1.2. Country 1.3. Time and country effects fixed effects fixed effects

School connectivity (ln) 0.211452*** 0.063807*** 0.032785* (0.025597) (0.010464) (0.015701)

Expenditure on 0.117436*** -0.027635** -0.021553* education (ln) (0.0.14535) (0.010464) (0.010000)

Average years of 0.365476*** 0.189922*** 0.026066 schooling (ln) (0.020275) (0.031171) (0.036088)

Time fixed effects? Yes No Yes

Country fixed effects? No Yes Yes

Observations 536 536 536

Countries 67 67 67

Time periods 8 8 8

R squared 0.89921 0.15006 0.018368

Source: EIU analysis Note: *** represents significance at the 1% level; ** represents significance at the 5% level; and * represents significance at the 10% level. Standard errors in parentheses © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 90 Narrowing the educational divide

Model 2: Learning outcomes • Interaction variable between income and economic growth levels and learning outcomes (to assess any differences in the impact of learning The second model assesses the association outcomes on GDP growth between between improved learning outcomes low-, middle- and high-income countries) (driven by improved school connectivity or other factors) and economic growth. By combining the estimates produced from models 1 and 2, we can assess: We measure economic growth as the growth in GDP per capita in each country using EIU data. • First, the impact of a change in school As in model 1, learning outcomes are proxied connectivity on educational outcomes by the learning-adjusted years of schooling indicator. In addition, we include controls for • Second, the impact of a change in other factors which could impact on GDP educational outcomes driven by school growth in addition to learning outcomes: connectivity on economic growth • Growth in fixed capital investment The findings from the regression analysis (based on EIU data) are shown in the table below. We present the findings from our preferred model • Growth in the size of the labour specification under three variations: time- force (based on EIU data) only fixed effects; country-only fixed • Time fixed effects (to capture effects; and time and country fixed effects. time-specific effects) Using a Lagrange Multiplier test of these • Regional dummy variables (to capture three variations, our preferred model is regional effects on GDP growth) the country-only fixed effects variation.

Model 2 results: Learning outcomes and GDP per capita Dependent variable: GDP per capita (ln) 2.1. Time fixed 2.2. Country 2.3. Time and effects fixed effects country fixed effects Learning adjusted years 1.170518*** 0.190218*** -0.019859 of schooling (ln) (0.149759) (0.054568) (0.050542) Investment (ln) 0.833662*** 0.263333*** 0.207800*** (0.027645) (0.011775) (0.011119) Labour force (ln) -0.709973*** 0.026041 -0.260657*** (0.028653) (0.034297) (0.036873) Time fixed effects? Yes No Yes Country fixed effects? No Yes Yes Observations 1,045 1,045 1,045 Countries 95 95 95 Time periods 11 11 11 R squared 0.77225 0.41991 0.29008

Model 3: School connectivity driven by a number of factors including school and economic growth connectivity, measured as discussed above in model 1. We include the same control variables The third model assesses the direct link as we have included in model 2 to capture between school connectivity and economic any other factors that may be associated with growth. While models 1 and 2 allow us to growth in GDP beyond school connectivity. assess this impact through improvements in educational outcomes, these models discount The findings from the regression analysis any other channels through which school are shown in the table below. We present connectivity can also support higher levels the findings from our preferred model of economic growth—for example, through specification under three variations: time- community development. This third model only fixed effects; country-only fixed is designed to capture these other factors. effects; and time and country fixed effects. As is the case in model 2, our key variable of Using a Lagrange Multiplier test of these interest in this model is growth in GDP per three variations, our preferred model is capita. We hypothesise that this growth is the country-only fixed effects variation.

Model 3 results: School connectivity and GDP per capita

Dependent variable: GDP per capita (ln)

3.1. Time fixed 3.2. Country 3.3. Time and country effects fixed effects fixed effects

School connectivity (ln) 0.212407** 0.109235*** 0.055837* (0.073378) (0.022948) (0.021807)

Learning-adjusted years 0.908090*** 0.370292*** 0.116960 of schooling (ln) (0.090992) (0.071041) (0.067072)

Investment (ln) 0.851494*** 0.216117*** 0.183997*** (0.015070) (0.012512) (0.011594)

Labour force (ln) -0.845526*** 0.120579** -0.127633** (0.016864) (0.039840) (0.041201)

Time fixed effects? Yes No Yes

Country fixed effects? No Yes Yes

Observations 672 672 672

Countries 84 84 84

Time periods 8 8 8

R squared 0.95316 0.51096 0.31372

Source: EIU research Note: *** represents significance at the 1% level; ** represents significance at the 5% level; and * represents significance at the 10% level. Standard errors in parentheses © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 92 Narrowing the educational divide

Model 4: Broadband speed • Government expenditure on education in and economic growth US$ per capita (based on data obtained from the National Center of Education Statistics) The final model is independent of the first three models and assesses the link • Employment rate (based on data from between the speed of broadband available the Bureau of Labor Statistics) to students and economic growth. • Time fixed effects (to capture time- The speed of internet connectivity is assessed specific effects on learning outcomes) using data from EducationSuperHighway’s State of the States report which provides The findings from the regression analysis are data between 2015 and 2019 on the shown in the table below. We present the median bandwidth of internet connectivity findings from our preferred model specification across states in the United States.243 under three variations: time-only fixed effects; In addition to broadband speed, we include state-only fixed effects; and time and state a number of controls in the model to fixed effects. Using a Lagrange Multiplier test capture other factors which could influence of these three variations, our preferred model GDP per capita at the state level: is the state-only fixed effects variation.

Model 4 results: Broadband connectivity speed and GDP per capita

Dependent variable: GDP per capita (ln)

4.1. Time fixed 4.2. State 4.3. Time and state effects fixed effects fixed effects

Bandwidth per student -0.037903* 0.0128487*** -0.0125565** (ln) (0.017198) (0.0033236) (0.0041272)

Expenditure on 0.475433*** 0.1915277*** 0.0556420 education (ln) (0.042010) (0.038086) (0.0351168)

Employment rate (ln) 1.120329*** 0.4834351*** 0.3480452*** (0.127397) (0.0956740) (0.0794204)

Time fixed effects? Yes No Yes

State fixed effects? No Yes Yes

Observations 250 250 250

States 50 50 50

Time periods 5 5 5

R squared 0.55654 0.53353 0.14611

Source: EIU research Note: *** represents significance at the 1% level; ** represents significance at the 5% level; and * represents significance at the 10% level. Standard errors in parentheses

243 EducationSuperHighway (2019). https://stateofthestates.educationsuperhighway.org/?postalCd=AL#state © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 93 Narrowing the educational divide

Impact assessment school connectivity on GDP growth beyond the impacts through improved education, Using the findings from the regression we use the regression results from model analysis discussed above, the next step in our 3. Using the same hypothetical changes in methodology uses scenario analysis to assess school connectivity levels, we assess the the potential impact on GDP (compared overall GDP impacts after accounting for with baseline measures of GDP) of improved impacts through improved school outcomes. school connectivity in our key markets of interest: Brazil, El Salvador, Kyrgyzstan, We aggregate the GDP impacts of Niger, Sierra Leone and the United States. improvements in school connectivity both through improved school outcomes Baseline analysis and through other channels to obtain an To assess the impacts of improved school overall estimate of the GDP impact in connectivity in the key markets, we first each country relative to the baseline. build baseline estimates of economic United States sub-national analysis indicators which assume no change in the levels of school connectivity. Our baseline The baseline and scenario analysis discussed estimates are obtained from EIU forecasts above is used to estimate the potential of GDP growth across countries. gains from improved school connectivity Scenario analysis in all of our key markets for the analysis, with the exception of the United States. Scenario analysis allows us to assess the implications of a change in the level of In the case of the United States, as national- school connectivity on GDP growth in each level connectivity levels are already on country by applying the findings from our a par with (or above) connectivity levels regression analysis. For each country, we observed in our reference markets, scenario assess three alternative scenarios which analysis would suggest no impact (or hypothesise that the baseline levels of school negative impacts) on GDP of matching connectivity in each country increase to reference market connectivity levels. match the current levels in three reference Instead, for our analysis in the United States, countries: Finland, Rwanda and South Korea. we use an alternative sub-national approach We assess two channels of to estimate potential GDP impacts based impact in each country: on the findings from regression model 4. While national-level school connectivity • GDP impacts from improved school levels in the United States are relatively high outcomes: Using the findings from in comparison with other countries, the regression models 1 and 2, we estimate challenge is more in terms of differences in the impact of a hypothetical change in connectivity levels across states—and even school connectivity levels on educational more importantly, in terms of the speed of outcomes in each country, and the connectivity. Hence, our analysis assesses subsequent impact of a change in the impact of increasing the speed of school educational outcomes on GDP growth. connectivity across states to both the • GDP impacts through community-level national average and the level observed in the effects: To capture additional impacts of highest-performing state (North Dakota).

Limitations of the analysis option—either using an index on school and areas for future work connectivity, or general measures of national connectivity—provides a perfect Empirical approaches to testing the proxy for the analysis. Future research relationships between different variables could consider developing or exploring based on observational data face a number new indicators of school connectivity to of limitations and challenges. Such models improve the robustness of the analysis and rely on simplifying assumptions which have to assess the direct link between school implications for the estimated relationships. connectivity and socioeconomic measures. The results of the modelling analysis presented in this report should therefore be - Learning outcomes data: To quantify the used with caution, and treated as indicative impact of school connectivity on individual of the potential impacts of improving children through improvements in the school connectivity. In this section, we quality of education, we assessed the outline some of the key limitations of our relationship between school connectivity analysis and areas of further research. and learning outcomes. We used learning outcomes as a measure to reflect the • Data availability: A key limitation of the quality of education which we proxy regression models adopted is the lack of based on learning-adjusted school years. availability of data. As a result, in many In addition to this being an imperfect cases, imperfect proxy indicators need to indicator of learning outcomes and be used to assess the relationships being educational quality, a further concern is tested. Furthermore, data gaps need to that changes in learning-adjusted school be filled using interpolation techniques. years are likely to impact the availability These adjustments introduce a degree of skills in the labour market with a lag of measurement error in the analysis and can bias the outputs of the models. rather than immediately. We partially accounted for this in the regression models - School connectivity data: School by testing the relationship between connectivity is a key variable of interest historical levels of learning-adjusted in our analysis to assess the implications school years and subsequent economic of variation in the level of connectivity growth. However, there is no justification on socioeconomic outcome measures. for imposing an arbitrary lag structure. However, data availability is highly limited. This is further challenged by the need for • Short-term vs long-term impacts: Given cross-country data over time in order to the limited availability of historical data, the conduct robust econometric modelling. As models primarily capture the short-term a result, the approach relies on an index impacts associated with improved school measure of school connectivity. While connectivity. It is reasonable to assume that this provides a sense of the variation in while benefits to individual students in terms connectivity across countries and over of improving school performance may be time, it has limited interpretability in relatively immediate, socioeconomic impacts the context of policy discussions. We are likely to arise only with a substantial time also test the model with more general lag. The socioeconomic impacts could be measures of national connectivity. Neither underestimated by the model as a result.

• Robustness of econometric specifications: time to assess the implications of changes There are a number of challenges which in connectivity levels on individual learning could arise in specifying econometric outcomes and future opportunities. This regression models. These include reverse approach requires in-depth country-level causality (for example, school connectivity data collection over a long period of time. being driven by economic growth, rather A similar approach was used in Deloitte than vice versa) and the omission of (2016) in the context of Australia.246 other variables in the regression (mainly variables which are both related to school • Assessing country-specific connectivity and economic growth). As a macroeconomic impacts: Our approach result, it is not clear whether any estimated uses an econometric regression model relationships between school connectivity to assess the macroeconomic impacts of and economic growth are truly causal in improved school connectivity. While our nature, or whether they simply indicate a model accounts for regional differences and correlation or co-movement between the differences in, for example, income levels, variables driven by other factors.244,245 overall, the findings suggest that a percentage change in school connectivity has the same • Assessing transmission mechanisms: The impact on GDP growth in each country. In econometric analysis conducted indicates reality, the economic structure of a country a relationship between school connectivity will play a significant role in the extent to and economic outcomes. However, it which improvements in school connectivity does not identify the specific transmission mechanisms through which these benefits could affect GDP. For example, assuming arise. We have sought to illustrate at least that improved school connectivity impacts one of these transmission mechanisms by GDP through productivity growth, this assessing the relationship between school productivity growth will impact the economy connectivity and learning outcomes. In differently depending on the sectoral make- reality, however, the transmissions are up, the existing skills in the workforce and multiple and highly complex. While our other factors. An alternative approach to analysis focuses on national-level data, future modelling the macroeconomic impacts could research could consider using individual-level use a computable general equilibrium (CGE) data to identify some of these transmission model to account for the specific nuances in mechanisms. This could include, for example, each country in order to model the impacts survey data which tracks individuals over of expansion of school connectivity.

244 Deloitte (2016), “The economic impact of improving school quality”. https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/ecoimpactschoolquality.pdf 245 Hanushek, E. and Woessmann, L. (2012), “Do better schools lead to more growth? Cognitive skills, economic outcomes, and causation”, J Econ Growth (2012) 17:267–321. https://hanushek.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Hanushek%2BWoessmann%202012%20 JEconGrowth%2017%284%29.pdf 246 Deloitte (2016), “The economic impact of improving school quality”. https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/ecoimpactschoolquality.pdf © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021 Connecting learners 96 Narrowing the educational divide

While every effort has been taken to verify the accuracy of this information, The Economist Intelligence Unit Ltd. cannot accept any responsibility or liability for reliance by any person on this report or any of the information, opinions or conclusions set out in this report. The findings and views expressed in the report do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsor.

LONDON GENEVA 20 Cabot Square Rue de l’Athénée 32 London, E14 4QW 1206 Geneva United Kingdom Switzerland Tel: (44.20) 7576 8000 Tel: (41) 22 566 2470 Fax: (44.20) 7576 8500 Fax: (41) 22 346 93 47 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

NEW YORK DUBAI 750 Third Avenue Office 1301a 5th Floor Aurora Tower New York, NY 10017 Dubai Media City United States Dubai Tel: (1.212) 554 0600 Tel: (971) 4 433 4202 Fax: (1.212) 586 1181/2 Fax: (971) 4 438 0224 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

HONG KONG SINGAPORE 1301 8 Cross Street 12 Taikoo Wan Road #23-01 Manulife Tower Taikoo Shing Singapore Hong Kong 048424 Tel: (852) 2585 3888 Tel: (65) 6534 5177 Fax: (852) 2802 7638 Fax: (65) 6534 5077 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2021