May 2012

Universitetet for milj- og biovitenskap (UMB) Institutt for internasjonale milj- og utviklingsstudier (Noragric) s Norge

The debate on Chiles higher education: a right or merchandise?

Javier Sandoval Guzmn
javsando@gmail.com

Abstract The education, rather than being considered a right that needs to be assured for any human being, it has been progressively deemed as merchandise subject to the laws of the markets. This idea neglects the essence of education as the transmission of knowledge that has been socially constructed and, as such, belonging to the whole human kind. In this article, I will focus on Chiles system of education, particularly on its tertiary (or higher) education, which is passing through a crisis rooted in decades ago. The crisis has deepened the countrys inequalities, leading to recent social outbreak commanded by the student movement.
Keywords: autonomy, crisis, human rights, perverse interests, merchandise, privatization, profit, free public education, public role, quality of the education, self-financing.

1. Introduction Perhaps the majority of the society is aware about the long existence of human rights as an idea, and maybe it is also well known that they have been defined, approved, and thus legalized in several international covenants and declarations. The right to education is one of them, as it can be seen in the UNs Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), or in the UNs International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966). However, beyond any agreement, it must be acknowledged that these rights have been systematically violated throughout history. Plus, some of them are not even

considered as human rights by numerous influential states (Uvin, 2004). The purpose of this article is to draw upon old and more recent debates addressing the question of why considering education as a right, acknowledging its different interpretations, perspectives and definitions, as well as examining how far is reality from the ideal fulfilment of this human right. In addition, I suggest some possible paths we can follow to positively influence the unfortunate situation of the education system in Chile. The education, rather than being considered a right that needs to be assured for any human being, it has been progressively deemed as merchandise subject to the laws of the market (see Brunner & Uribe, 2007). This idea neglects the essence of education as the transmission of knowledge that has been socially constructed and, as such, belonging to the whole human kind. Whether the right to education has been violated or not since its conception has been a source of debate for different sectors of the society, wherein student movements have played an important role. The historical demands of this latter group have comprised not only the defence of this right, for they have also been involved in struggles for peace, democracy and many other important issues affecting societies all around the world (see for example DeGroot, 1998; Van Maanen, 1966). In the following debate, though, I will focus on the case of Chiles system of education, particularly its tertiary (or higher) education. In specific terms, this situation is rooted in the countrys recent history and the different policies that have systematically pushed the system towards its definite privatization. It must be acknowledged that the idea of at least a partial privatization is since long ago, officially widespread, being also accepted in international covenants (see for example UN, 1966, Art. 13. 4). In the case of Chile, the aspects defining a privatization according to many experts fit well in the Chilean model (see Belfield & Levin, 2002; Walford, 1990). The actors that have guided this trend, however, have not explicitly recognized the privatization of the system as their final objective. With the absence of political will to consider the social demands, the outcomes of this crisis reached an unexpected level of connotation in 2006. This year witnessed mass participation of students in strikes that lasted for several months, putting in evidence the necessity of structural change. This process -led mainly by high school students- was called la revolucin

pingina1 (see Bellei, Contreras & Valenzuela, 2010; Gutirrez & Caviedes, 2006). Later, in 2011 with the still unsolved crisis of the system, the movement swept with the recent history of movements, reaching enormous levels of participation that comprised not only students from all the educational levels, but also different sectors of the society towards the defence of the education as a human right (Valdebenito, 2011). However, its necessary to point out that students and different sectors of the society have reacted against the perceived crisis and privatization since its outset. Thus, the student movement has been struggling to build structural change in the system, including the laws that define it. In this struggle, students have resorted to different and innovative methods of raising their claims, aiming also to include the whole society. The government has reacted with brutal levels of repression (Ferretti, & Massardo, 2006; Grez, 2012). Students demand free and quality education necessary for overcoming the high social inequalities that hinder the countrys development (CONFECH, 2011). This article analyses the importance of establishing a free public system and the requirement of quality in all levels of the educational system to address the crisis. The quality of the education it is also a key aspect in both public and private institutions. The student movement has included all these relevant factors of the crisis in its demands, providing largely discussed proposals for building structural change. These proposals, far from being utopic, are backed by strong technical analyses. For example, a study by Frigolett, Mayol, Muoz, and Pizarro (2011) demonstrate that establishing a free public system is possible through three different sources of funding that wouldnt affect the stability of the countrys economy. These and many other proposals also address flaws in the economic system that may represent additional source of inequalities, like the misuse of inputs from Chiles copper mining together with its privatization. For a deeper understanding of these connected issues, we should analyse the context of Chiles recent history and its society.

Penguin is the name coloquially given to primary and secondary school students because of their uniform resembling colors of a penguin.
1

 2. Why Right to Education in Chile?

Chile, a country of ca. 17 million people, suffers from enormous inequalities. The average of the per-capita autonomous-income2 of the richest percentile (richest 1%) of the population is about 260 times higher than that of the poorest ten per cent. Besides, almost 60 per cent of the population cannot satisfy their basic needs (e.g. food, shelter, clothing, education, health, mobility, recreation, etc.). However, these figures remain hidden when measuring growth by using indicators as GDP per capita (Durn & Kremerman, 2012; see also Fig.1). In this context, experts have demonstrated that the private investment coming from families is substantial in the sense that they can spend 40 per cent of their income only in their childrens education (Durn & Kremerman, 2012). In the same way, evidence shows that Chiles structural inequalities are directly linked to the progressive privatization, which not only maintains but also increases inequalities. The outset of the privatization trend in the education system can be traced back to the times of Pinochets dictatorship, with the education reform of 1981 (see DFL N1 art. 15).

Fig.1: Distribution of households autonomous-income by decile of autonomous per capita-income (Mideplan Casen, 2009). The decile I has an autonomous-income of 64,361 Chilean pesos (CLP) (i.e. approx. USD 129). The decile IX earns CLP 1,149,137 (approx. USD 2,300). The decile X earns CLP 2,958,175 (approx. USD 5,920).

Autonomous-income -also called primary income- is defined as all payments received by the household as a result of the possession of productive factors. Includes salaries and wages, self-employment earnings, the selfprovision of goods produced by the household, income, interest, pensions, and retirement. (Mideplan Casen, 2009, p. 2. Own translation).
2

5 Two of the main changes imposed by the dictatorship were the progressively

decrease in the state funding given to public universities, and the allowance and promotion of private education. This process was of much significance, since it created a market in the system of education. With Pinochets reform, Chile became the first Latin American country in charging tuition fees to students in public universities (OECD, 2009b). This funding source represents today a large percentage of the budget of these institutions. They have then been forced to increase the tuition fees every year -given the continuous decline in state funding- thus promoting the self-financing logic. Other countries, through long lasting strikes, were more successful in preventing attempts to introduce fees in public higher education3. Throughout decades, the effects have worsened and Chile is nowadays the country with the highest level of privatization in education (see Fig. 2), with public universities getting less than 15% of their budget -as an average- from public funding (see Contralora, 2011). The remainder comes mostly from the students families through education fees (see Fig. 3), which have become the second highest education fees in the world4, just below the US5. This situation has devastating effects on the population. For example, a student who gets a private loan to study will owe USD 13,000 after 4 years of studies at the university, whereas the minimum wage in Chile is about USD 360 (Araya, 2012; BCN, 2011a; OECD, 2011). Thus, most of Chilean students are obliged to go in debt if they want to access higher education, with the consequence of being forced to pay during 20 years after graduating to be able to return the loans they got from private financing institutions (Rodrguez, 2011). It is not hard to recognize that this logic only deepens the inequality the entire educational system drags. All the more, students of lower and medium strata have not even been able to get these credits, thus being completely denied of the possibility of accessing or remaining at the higher education level. The World Bank itself states that this problem "is due to imperfections in capital markets" because "borrowers do not accept the promise of future earnings as guarantee of payment" (World Bank, 1996; as cited in Mora, 2005, p. 257. Own translation.) The figures put in evidence that the education is no longer considered by the Chilean political class as a right associated to what is known as positive liberty. This means that even though the middle and lower
3 4

Famous is the case of the nine-month strike at the UNAM, in Mexico, 1999 (Sotelo, 2000). Around USD 9,000 a year. 5 Around USD 22,000 a year.

socioeconomic strata are not prevented from being educated, they dont receive the minimum conditions to access it (see Uvin, 2004).

Fig.2: Share of private expenditure on tertiary educational institutions (2000, 2005 and 2008) and change, in percentage points, of the share of private expenditure between 2000 and 2008. (OECD, 2011)

Fig.3: Distribution of public and private expenditure on educational institutions (2008) in tertiary education (OECD, 2011)

7 To further describe the flaws of the system, we need to focus in the higher or

tertiary education in which a brief description should account the different institutions comprising it. By and large, there are three kinds of institutions: the public or state-owned institutions; the private institutions created before the education reform of 1981; and the private institutions created after that reform (Beyer, 2001). The first two categories of institutions mentioned above, are known as the traditional universities (Beyer, 2001, p.8). On the other hand, the rest of the private educational institutions correspond to a large number of institutions (much larger than the traditional group) that could be considered as just sheer examples of private companies in the new education market (see Brunner & Uribe, 2007). One aspect that may distinguish many traditional universities, in their original or current functioning, from the later private educational institutions is the concept of public role. This is understood basically as the responsibility the universities must have towards solving problems of a society (Biesta et al., 2009). Different laws defining Chiles system of education have specified that the educational institutions in Chile should function as non-profit institutions (see DFL N1 art. 15, LOCE art. 30, LGE Ch.II, sec.9); a statement found also in laws enacted during Pinochets dictatorship. However, the private universities indeed function as for-profit corporations that benefit from the educational business by using multiple methods 6 . Evidence also shows that these universitycorporations are strong ideological apparatuses. Among their owners and shareholders we account: parliamentarians, ministers and former ministers of the two main political coalitions, religious sects like the Opus Dei and the Legionaries of Christ, and large national and transnational business groups (Mnckeberg, 2007). These facts remind us to what Walford (1990, p.19) states about the objectives of the education:
For education is inherently political () it is necessary to recognise that one of the great threads which runs through the history of education is the conflict between education as a liberating and egalitarian influence and education as a way of justifying elitism and privilege.

To cite an example, it has been demonstrated that owners of private universities are also owners of estate agencies, which at the same time own the land or buildings being rented by these universities, using the formula of leasing. This allows them avoiding taxes or harnessing the legal gaps to make profits. Unfortunately, because of their nature, these cases cannot be furher investigated (see Mnckeberg, 2007).
6

8 Moreover, the scenario of Chiles education ought to be also analysed in the global

context, so to get an idea of how and with what priority it is addressed. The low level of public expenditure on education in Chile (0.3% of GDP in higher education), compared to the average of OECD countries (1.0% of GDP in higher education) can be evidenced by different indicators, being typical examples the public expenditure per student or the total public expenditure on education as a share of GDP (OECD, 2009a). Table 1 (see appendix) shows the latter indicator, contrasted with private expenditure (education fees, educational extension, sale of patrimony and services, etc.). These figures seem to be in accordance to what multilateral financial institutions such as the World Bank promote and emphasize. These institutions define education as an industry producing profits, or as an investment in "human capital"-due to the higher revenue expected as a result of it (Gascn & Cepeda, 2008). This encourages neoliberal sectors to expand the idea that the education should be seen as a private good, rather than a human right as subscribed in international agreements. As an example of the latter we have the UNs International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, in which free higher education is promoted:
"[H]igher education shall be equally accessible to all, on the basis of capacity, by every appropriate means, and in particular by the progressive introduction of free education." (UN-CESCR, Part III, Art. 13, sec. 2d.)

In addition, UNESCO (1998a) poses strong arguments against the individualist proprivatization perspectives. These arguments help understand why establishing a free system of education (in all levels) is a fundamental factor for establishing an education system with a public role of building a sustainable and democratic society:
The concept of educational income in personal benefit needs to be replaced by the concept of external economy and especially by the concept of social return, which designates the indirect benefits generated by the education in benefit of the society. These are difficult to quantify, but this does not make them less real: the elevation of knowledge and skills have an impact on the growth rate and competitiveness of the country; the investment made by previous generations relapses in later generations; it is also a desire to fully exploit the skills of those who are more capable (the concept of merit) of serving for development; raising

9
the level of education affects the development of a more democratic culture and allows to become distant and a resistant to arbitraries (UNESCO, 1998A, p.50, quotation marks in the original. Own translation.)

Another important aspect of higher education is the its effect in social mobility, which is a way of helping people to get out from poverty. This is evidenced by the effect of the different levels of education in peoples average income (see Fig.4). In this sense, UNESCO (2009, p.10) sates that [t]odays inequalities in education are tomorrows inequalities in the distribution of wealth and wider opportunities for human development. Continuing with the strategic importance of a country's higher education accessible to all, Angel Ruiz (2000) explains that:
[T]he impact of actions in higher education not only has positive effects on national product-management in a direct way, through professional cadres or through the developed investigations, but also on the educational system itself. Higher education is a key part of the progress of pre-university education, if properly developed (p.227. Own translation.)

However, far from demonstrating a proper development, in Chile we have a scenario where most of the students come disproportionately from the highest income quintile. The advocates of privatization use this fact when they claim that the state funding to higher education is regressive, since in this way it is favouring the wealthiest (see Friedman, 1979; Hernes, 2002; OECD, 2009b). However, in this argument its not acknowledged that its precisely the system and its privatization trend that has created such an uneven proportion of rich and poor students in higher education. This unfortunate fact has made the argument in favour of the privatization an apparently irrefutable truth. Conversely, some experts claim that this is a serious mistake:
() [A] total system funding i.e. free higher education- has a positive effect on equality, even without considering the effects of collection. In the case of Chile, free education creates an unambiguous declining in the Gini coefficient. (Corvaln & Sanhueza, 2011, para. 3. Own translation.)

10

Fig.4: Average income by level of education7 (Futuro Laboral based on CASEN, 2006; as cited in DIPRES, 2010)

In addition, Corvaln and Sanhueza (2011) argue that establishing free education is not a regressive policy neither confirms the slogan that by doing it poor people would finance the rich (para. 16. Own translation.) These authors also cite results of Engel, Galetovic and Raddatz (1999), giving support to the idea that establishing free education has important redistributing effects:
() Redistribution has an unpleasant arithmetic: its redistributed slightly when it takes out from the rich, but its redistributed strongly when giving to the poor. This is to say, taxes and subsidies have influence upon inequality mainly through its effect on low-income sectors, and this effect is accentuated in highly unequal countries like ours. (Engel, Galetovic & Raddatz, 1999; as cited in Corvalan & Sanhueza, 2011, para. 5. Own translation)

Moreover, to continue examining the negative effects of the logic of self-financing, its important to consider another of its sources; namely, the private donors. In many cases,
The original histogram shows values in Chilean pesos (CLP) from 2007. For the purposes of this article and for the sake of legibility, the data were modified considering an approximate exchange rate of USD 1 = CLP 500. In order to estimate a real value, it can be used the exchange rate at the moment of writing this article, i.e. USD 1 = CLP 482,12 (Banco Central, 07/May/2012) which of course, produces no substantial difference.
7

11

these donations have represented substantial amounts of money. Based on this it can be described how private education and the self-financing of higher education institutions, introduce perverse interests and biases affecting teaching and research, whether in response to these donations or just as the intention of the owner of the private institution. As examples, one can mention the businesses of private universities in Chile or the cases of the California-Berkeley and Florida universities in USA (Mnckeberg, 2007; Warde, 2001). To describe these perverse interests it in more detailed terms, Collins (2000, para. 1-2) contends:
Science is losing credibility. Conflicts of interest, biased studies and secrecy are undermining science's reputation and its truth-seeking objective. Scientist-consultants who are paid by industries but who serve as faculty professors frequently testify before Congress and federal regulatory agencies without pausing to reveal their industry connections. Science departments in public universities enter into multimillion-dollar contracts with private corporations, yet few details are revealed about the nature of such agreements. Medical and other science journals all too frequently publish articles without adequately disclosing even major conflicts of interest.

Thereby it seems to be worth asking us: what could have been hidden behind results of research related to tobacco, atmosphere pollution, food contamination, or drugs and medications? The described situation gives us another strong argument against the privatization of the education or, in the opposite sense, to establish it as a human right. If we still prefer to stay dubious, an ethic or at least responsible demand would be to cut the public funding for institutions that have not been able to demonstrate non-profiting functioning in their educational service. However, one can also step aside of the debate related to the existence of private education. This must consider, though, that assuming the existence of private education as an immovable reality involves taking over the negative effects it entails. These effects become more important when acknowledging that private institutions prepare and indoctrinate the majority 8 of the professionals in Chile. Moreover, evidence shows that private educational institutions have no accreditation of its quality, which becomes relevant if we recognise that the negative effects can all be
8

CASEN (2009).

12

embedded in a lack of quality in its broad sense (see Torres, Riquelme, & Guzmn, 2011; BCN, 2011b). Therefore, another central aspect in this debate draws upon our understanding of quality of education and the ways we can measure and implement it. Although one can naturally assume that right to education intrinsically refers to a quality education, it seems convenient to explicitly refer to it. Unfortunately, the task of defining the concept of quality escapes from the scope of this article. However, based on the arguments this article draws upon we can still agree in some basic pillars that quality education must encompass. This allows us to establish a connection between quality education, the public role expected from it, and the kind of human beings this education should create. This connection emphasises the importance of human rights, and particularly principles like solidarity, pluralism, democracy, and self-determination adapted to a specific society (see Bellei, Contreras & Valenzuela 2010; Carr and Hartnett 1996). These principles are to be considered as important as technical considerations of quality. To this end, a key aspect is the democracy within the institutions and their autonomy. The relevance of a democratic functioning is relevant because it enables a broad participation of the community in education principles and objectives. In addition, it deepens the understanding of this principle in the community, creating the habit of its importance in daily life (Vaccarezza, 2006). On the other hand, the autonomy principle, which in Chile is enacted by law (see LGE, art. 65), should always be seized and sheltered. The communities within the education institutions and the society in general may focus in deepening these practices, because they dont require reaching the highest levels of the political system, but only local reforms and agreements. While implementing these principles, the education institutions may also collaborate and contribute to alternative methods of non-formal or popular education. This may create symbiotic process that would strengthen the public role as well as enabling the society to access a permanent and universal process of education. Nonformal or popular methods of education have been successfully developed in many countries in Latin America (Barreiro, 1978; Parra, 2007). Pavez (2003) poses that it is specifically in these terms that public institutions are to be distinguished from private ones. The former institutions should address society not only in their academic activity, but also

13

in the way they are constituted. They should resemble the society, with its problems and contradictions, thus enabling the students to develop values of coexistence, tolerance and respect. On the other hand, we should realize that private entities need not have any interest in meeting social goals, either because these goals are not part of their mission and vision statement, or because their existence relies specifically in not meeting them. Their raison d'tre is perhaps based on their ideological influence, their profit-making objective, or both at the same time (see Brunner & Uribe, 2007; Mnckeberg, 2007). 3. Conclusions: Some possible paths Consequently, the society can start finding the ways of implementing the basic pillars of a quality public education, which conceives education as a fundamental human right. Privatizing this right is equivalent to the privatization of knowledge, which is a joint creation of humanity; thus by essence belonging to all. It is possible for the society to define and start implementing the character of public education the country needs. In addition, while building the basic pillars of this change also the continuity of the process must be ensured. Thereby, the idea that defining all types and contents of the imparted education is a unique and exclusive privilege of the state becomes inconvenient. What to do then with the alternation of governments, each of them with their own different political agendas? How does the project of public education with its social role react to this? The focus should then be on demanding what the state is obliged to fulfil, given the respective laws, and regardless of the coalition in the executive power. A failure in these terms would condemn the government to illegality and illegitimacy. The society must focus in making the state respect and ensure the right to quality education, and also prohibiting the for-profit educational institutions, being both of these duties established by the constitution (see LGE, 2007). Recognising the education as a human right also requires a transition to a free public system of education. Hence the society must demand the progressive increase in basal funding for the public education budget to move in that direction. At the same time the society and the communities within the institutions can develop the fundamental contents

14

for a quality education with social goals, in all institutions -public or private- without exception. Thus, the society may advance towards creating a system that: a) ensures a permanent process of education during peoples whole lives; b) ensures access without economic nor any kind of discrimination; c) contributes to the reduction of inequalities that come from earlier education levels; d) plays a fundamental role to help solve societys problems; d) ends with the self-financing logic of public universities, moving towards a free system. An additional requirement is that the institutions willing to get public funds should remain free of ideological biases, market-influence or any religious imposition. The doors of educational institutions should finally be opened towards the society in general. To accomplish this, the formal education institutions should work together, in a symbiotic process, with non-formal and popular initiatives of education. Thus, the ideological forprofit perspective and the private institutions might succumb to these demands, prevailing the commitment towards solving societys problems. The student movement can take strategic actions capable of getting popular support. These actions may include ways of curtailing the possibility of using education as merchandise or as an ideology-transmitter. Therefore, it becomes essential to prepare the society for the debate of allowing or not profit-making in education, and make it conscious of the negative effects of its privatization. The students, above all, have the duty to lead this process and search for the unconditional social support it needs. In conclusion, evidence shows that far from respecting, promoting or enshrining the right to education in Chile, its privatization works towards an opposite direction. Besides, several aspects demonstrate how the failures of the system would deepen if this privatizing trend is maintained. However, this is not happening because the solution remains unknown, but because there is no political will to concede what the majority of the society is demanding as a solution. Worse, it is uncertain if the government is capable, and prone, of strengthening the repression they have already used against the agents of change. Perhaps these coercive ways wont succeed in eliminating a seed of change that seems to be growing, faster and stronger than ever.

 4. References
Araya, C. (2012, April 21). 78 carreras superan en ms de un 100% arancel de referencia [78

15

university programmes exceed in more than 100% the reference fees]. La Tercera. [online] Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://diario.latercera.com/2012/04/21/01/contenido/pais/31-106812-9-78-carreras-superanen-mas-de-un--100-arancel-de-referencia.shtml Banco Central [online]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://www.bcentral.cl/ Barreiro, J., (1978). Educacin popular y proceso de concientizacin [Popular education and awareness process]. Siglo Veintiuno Editores. BCN [Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional de Chile] (2011a). Sueldo mnimo, sueldo base y derecho a semana corrida [Minimum wage, basal salary and the right to a full week] [online]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://www.bcn.cl/guias/sueldo_minimo_slario_base BCN [Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional de Chile] (2011b). Acreditacin de la educacin superior [Accreditation of higher education] [online]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://www.bcn.cl/guias/acreditacion-de-la-educacion-superior Bellei, C., Contreras, D., & Valenzuela, J.P. (Eds.). (2010). Ecos de la revolucin pingina. Avances, debates y silencios en la reforma educacional [Echoes of the penguin revolution] Chile: Universidad de Chile. Beyer, H. (2001). Las Reformas de la Educacin en Chile [The reforms of Chilean Education]. In F. Larran and R. Vergara (Eds.). La Transformacin Econmica de Chile (pp. 643-708). Centro de Estudios Pblicos, Chile. Biesta, G., Kwiek, M., Lock, G., Martins, H., Masschelein, J., Papatsiba, V., & Simons, M. (2009). What Is the Public Role of the University? A Proposal for a Public Research Agenda. European Educational Research Journal. 8 (2). Brunner, J., & Uribe, D. (2007). Mercados universitarios [University markets]. Santiago, Chile: Ediciones Universidad Diego Portales. Carr, W., & Hartnett, A. (1996). Education and the Struggle for Democracy: The Politics of Educational Ideas. Open University Press. CASEN [Encuesta de Caracterizacin Socioeconmica Nacional] (2009) [online]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from

16
http://www.ministeriodesarrollosocial.gob.cl/casen2009/RESULTADOS_CASEN_2009.pd f

Collins, R. (2000). Assuring Truth in Science a Must, Baltimore Sun [online]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2000-08-29/news/0008290081_1_nas-science-conflicts-ofinterest CONFECH [Confederacin de Estudiantes de Chile] (2011). Bases tcnicas para un sistema gratuito de educacin [Technical bases for a free education system] [online]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://www.elmostrador.cl/media/2011/10/Bases-tcnicas-para-un-sistema-gratuito-deeducacin.pdf Contralora [Contralora General de la Repblica de Chile] (2011). Anlisis de universidades estatales [Analysis of state universities]. Divisin de Anlisis Contable. rea Empresas Pblicas y Universidades. Corvaln, A., & Sanhueza, C. (2011, October 7). La educacin superior gratuita no es una poltica regresiva [Higher free education is not a regressive policy] [online]. Ciper. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://ciperchile.cl/2011/10/07/la-educacion-superior-gratuita-no-es-una-politica-regresiva/ DeGroot, G. (Ed.). (1998). Student Protest: The Sixties and After. Longman. DFL [Decreto con Fuerza de Ley] N1 (1981). Art. 15, Ministerio de Educacin Pblica. DIPRES [Direccin de Presupuestos] (2010). Trminos Tcnicos de Referencia Evaluacin de Impacto Programas de Becas de Educacin Superior [online]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://www.dipres.gob.cl/572/articles-70699_doc_pdf3.pdf Durn, G., & Kremerman, M. (2012, April 2) Desigualdad en Chile: el problema es el 1% ms rico [Inequality in Chile: the problem is the richest 1%]. El Mostrador. [online]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://www.elmostrador.cl/opinion/2012/04/02/desigualdad-en-chile-el-problema-es-el-1mas-rico/ Ferretti, P., & Massardo, J. (2006). El mayo de los estudiantes secundarios. Un movimiento social emergente que pone en evidencia los rasgos sociales y culturales del modelo neoliberal en Chile [The May of high school students. An emerging social movement that evidences social and cultural features of the neoliberal model in Chile]. CPU-e, Revista de Investigacin Educativa, 3. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://cdigital.uv.mx/handle/123456789/5207


Frigolett, H., Mayol, A., Muoz, S., & Pizarro, R. (2011). Educacin 2013 [Education 2013]. [e-book] Santiago, Chile: Fundacin Terram. pp. 27. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://www.terram.cl/images/storiesterram_educacion_final2011.pdf Gascn, P., & Cepeda, J. L. (2008). Globalizacin y mercantilizacin de la educacin. Nuevos retos para los Estados y las universidades pblicas [Globalization and marketization of education. New challenges for states and public universities]. Veredas. Nmero especial. UAM-Xochimilco. Mxico, pp.7-19.

17

Grez, S. (2012, January-February). Chile 2012: El movimiento estudiantil en la encrucijada [Chile 2012: the student movement at the crossroads]. Le Monde Diplomatique. Chile. Gutirrez T. & Caviedes C. (2006). Revolucin Pingina: La primera gran movilizacin del siglo XXI en Chile [Penguin revolution: The first major mobilization of the XXI century in Chile]. Ayn. Santiago, Chile. Hernes G. (2002). Fundamentals of educational planning, in education privatization: Causes, consequences and planning implications. UNESCO. LGE [Ley General de Educacin]. Ch. II, sec. 9. LOCE [Ley Orgnica Constitucional de Enseanza ]. Art. 30. Mideplan [Ministerio de Planificacin] Casen (2009) [online]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://www.ministeriodesarrollosocial.gob.cl/casen2009/distribucion_ingreso_casen_2009.p df Mnckeberg, M.O. (2007). El negocio de las universidades en Chile [The business of universities in Chile]. Chile: Debate. Mora, O. (2005). Las polticas educativas en Amrica Latina: un anlisis de la educacin superior desde la visin de la banca multilateral [Educational policies in Latin America: an analysis of higer education from the vision of multilateral banks]. Apuntes del Cenes. II Semestre de 2005 (pp. 249-262). OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] (2011). Education at a Glance. OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] (2009a). Education at a Glance. OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] (2009b). La Educacin Superior en Chile. Revisin de Polticas Nacionales de Educacin [Higher Education in Chile. Review of National Education Policy]. OECD Publishing. Parra, O. (2007). Dilogos con Freire para una pedagoga universitaria [Dialogues with Freire for a university pedagogy]. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana.


Pavez, J. (2003). Prlogo. In La educacin no es una mercanca [The education is not merchandise]. Le Monde Diplomatique. Rodrguez, A. (2011, September 21). En Foro Econmico Analizaron Financiamiento de la

18

Educacin Superior [The financing of higher education was analysed in an economy forum]. Rectora Universidad Austral de Chile. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://www.uach.cl/organizacion/rectoria/noticia.php?codigo=12692 Ruiz, A. (2000). El destino de Costa Rica y la educacin superior [Costa Ricas destiny and higher education]. Editorial de la Universidad de Costa Rica. Consejo Nacional de Rectores de Costa Rica. Sotelo, A. (2000). Neoliberalismo y educacin. La huelga en la UNAM a finales de siglo. [Neoliberalism and education. The UNAMs strike at the end of the century]. Ediciones El Caballito S. A. Torres, V., Riquelme, G., & y Guzmn, J.A. (2011, September 29). As opera el escandaloso sistema de acreditacin de las universidades [Thereby operates the scandalous accreditation system of universities] [online]. Ciper. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://ciperchile.cl/2011/09/29/asi-opera-el-escandaloso-sistema-de-acreditacion-de-lasuniversidades/ UN [United Nations] (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations [online]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://daccess-ddsny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/043/88/IMG/NR004388.pdf?OpenElement UN-CESCR [United Nations] General Assembly (1966). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 993, p. 3. [online]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/3ae6b36c0.html UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization] (2009). Overcoming inequality: why governance matters. Oxford University Press. UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization] (1998a, October 5-9). Conferencia mundial sobre la educacin superior: La educacin superior en el siglo XXI. Visin y accin [World Conference on Higher Education: The higher education in the XXI century. Vision and action]. Documento de trabajo. Paris. UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization] (1998b, October 5-9).

19
Conferencia mundial sobre la educacin superior: La educacin superior en el siglo XXI. Visin y accin [World Conference on Higher Education: The higher education in the XXI century. Vision and action]. Documento de trabajo. Tomo I, Informe final. Pars.

UNESCO [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization] (1979, December 13). Declaracin de Mxico. Conferencia regional de ministros de educacin y de ministros encargados de la planificacin econmica [Mexico declaration. Regional conference of ministers of education and Ministers responsible of economic planning]. Mxico, DF. Uribe, A. (1974). El libro negro de la intervencin norteamericana en Chile [The black book of North American intervention in Chile]. Siglo Veintiuno Editores. Uvin, P. (2004). Human Rights and Development. Kumarian Press, Inc. Vaccarezza, L. S. (2006) Autonoma universitaria, reformas y transformacin social [University autonomy, reforms and social transformation]. In Universidad e Investigacin Cientfica. Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales (CLACSO). Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://biblioteca.clacso.edu.ar/clacso/se/20100614120356/universidad.pdf#page=28 Valdebenito, L. (2011). The quality of the education in Chile: A problem of concept and praxis? Review of the concept of quality starting from two instances of student mobilization (2006 and 2011). Cisma. Centro Telrico de Investigaciones Tericas (CTIT), pp. 1-25. Van Maanen, G. (1966). The international student movement: History and background. International Documentation and Information Centre. Warde, I. (2001). For sale: US academic integrity. Conflicts of Interest on the Campus. Le Monde Diplomatique [online]. Retrieved May 5, 2012, from http://mondediplo.com/2001/03/11academic World Bank (1996). World Development Report 1996. World Bank.

 5. Appendix

20

Table 1: Expenditure in education (in 2006) as a share of GDP, according to their source of financing, i.e. public or private. (OECD, 2009a).

(1): The reference year is 2007. EU19: 19 countries of the OECD that are part of the EU and which data are available or can be estimated.