FERNANDO REIMERS Pathways for Change
made in how teachers and principals are appointed, in
the work load and performance of teachers, or in how
teachers and principals are trained and supervised.
Private entrepreneurs can also establish schools
and universities where they can develop innovative
programs for underserved groups in the population or
create higher quality or more relevant education programs. At present, much of the expansion of secondary schools and universities in the region is the result
of this form of entrepreneurship. Most of the growth
in access to higher education over the last decade, and
in some countries also to secondary education, is the
result of private institutions created by entrepreneurs.
These entrepreneur-led facilities are meeting a demand
not adequately satisfied by existing public institutions.
The ways in which they innovate vary. In some cases they set
out to serve some of the poorest segments of the population,
offering education services that
meet the expectations of these
groups with the flexibility necessary to accommodate their
personal needs. In other cases,
they set out to create programs that more clearly align
with the needs of the labor market, or create incubators
of innovation and facilitate links with the private sector.
The institutions that have emerged from these efforts
range from universities serving the “bottom of the pyramid” to elite schools and universities. The willingness
of parents to pay the tuition charged by these private
educational establishments suggests a widespread perception that they are either the only alternative available to groups excluded from public options, or that they
provide a higher quality education than public institutions with, for instance, more personalized instruction,
better science and technology education, better sports
education, more character education, better foreign language instruction, or better economic and employment
prospects for their graduates.
Entrepreneurs can also lead educational innovation
in the non-formal education sector, where there is less
regulation. It is much easier to establish a private acad-
emy that offers instruction but does not lead to a for-
mal degree than to establish an accredited school or
university. Conceivably, the expansion of knowledge-
based industries will stimulate a demand for learning
that outstrips demand for the credentials provided by
the formal education system. The non-formal field is a
vast arena for innovation in education. It can provide
a broad range of services, such as training for specific
job skills, language instruction, after-school enrichment
programs, summer camps, and character and leadership
education. It can also offer university-level or graduate-
level instruction that does not lead to a formal degree—
for example, executive education for senior executives
or professionals.
The non-formal field is a vast arena for innovation in
education. It can provide a broad range of services,
such as training for specific job skills, language
instruction, after-school enrichment programs, summer
camps, and character and leadership education.
or in the extent to which the participants in these education programs can be certified as possessing those
specific skills. Private schools and universities need to
be approved and supervised by government authorities, and the barriers to entry can be especially high for
newcomers. Since formal education is a public good, all
private entrepreneurs need some level of coordination
with public officials who have authority to regulate activity in the formal sector, including the approval of privately initiated, managed or funded programs in public
institutions. This process can create an onerous burden
to change and thwart innovation. If new programs of
teacher education, for example, need to be certified by
ministries of education or by the most established universities, this may induce a bias to replicate the traditional forms of teacher education.
There is obvious great promise in facilitating coordinated efforts between public and private sector entrepreneurs. Capitalizing on their maximum freedom
to design innovative programs, entrepreneurial leaders of private institutions can work closely with like-minded leaders of public institutions who can help
them scale up such programs. Together, they can generate the quality and scale of innovation that is neces-
