ECUADOR`S MINISTER OF EDUCATION RESPONSE

TO ROSA MARIA TORRES

Dear members of the Forum of Ecuador’s Ex Ministers of Education:

Rosa María Torres (RMT) has expressed some personal concerns about the government
declaring Ecuador a “Literate Country” this past September 8th. In sum, RMT states the
following in her public letter: (a) that the Ministry of Education acted without enough
evidence when it declared Ecuador a literate country (supposedly with the “approval of
the UNESCO Office in Quito”), and should have waited for the analysis of the home
surveys results; and (b) that the projection of illiteracy included in the report La
alfabetización en el Ecuador: Evolución histórica, información actualizada y mapa
nacional de analfabetismo, 2009 (“Literacy in Ecuador: Historic Evolution, Updated
Information and National Illiteracy Map, 2009”), prepared by Juan Ponce and Mercedes
Onofa at the request of UNESCO and published by the Ministry of Education, is,
according to her, unreliable because it labels people as “literate” only because they have
registered and completed the program, without an evaluation to verify what they
actually learned.

Regarding her claims, I would like to clarify the following:

1. As stated in the introduction of the report Literacy in Ecuador, when the

Ecuadorean government decided to launch the Manuela Saenz Literacy Program in
2007, it announced the commitment to reduce the illiteracy rate to less than 4% by
August 2009. In order to achieve this goal, the Ministry of Education made an
important effort –mainly during 2008 and 2009- thanks to which approximately
420.000 people all over the country attended literacy programs. In addition to that, it
is necessary to highlight the efforts of the local governments, which also
participated of this endeavor to reduce illiteracy rates by applying the international
“Yes, I Can” program. Since the “quality of life” surveys conducted by the National
Institute for Statistics and Census will only be ready by the end of this year, it was
not possible to use them to verify the goals of the literacy campaign. Therefore, the
only way of tentatively measuring the impact of the vast efforts of the literacy
campaign in the past few years was through a projection, such as the one we used.
At the moment, this is the only data that we have available and it is reliable in the
sense that those responsible for this program have kept a careful record of the
people who participated in the program.

2. It is pertinent to point out that the Ministry of Education used its own resources to
make the declaration of Ecuador as a literate country, without the approval of any
other institution. Contrary to what RMT claims, the UNESCO Regional Office in
Quito did not give its approval to this declaration simply because UNESCO does not
make statements about illiteracy rates, and it does not certify such declarations made
 by any government, which is something that RMT knows very well. In this case, the
UNESCO Regional Office in Quito co-sponsored a research project that aimed at
making a reasonable projection of the condition of illiteracy in Ecuador. The
Ministry of Education has given an undeniable proof of transparency by publishing
this report, from which RMT collects information and chooses to read it her own
way. In this context, I would like to emphasize that we were the first ones to point
out the limitations that the figures of the literacy campaign may have from an
academic point of view. RMT points this out, and emphasizes it as if it were the
only thing worth paying attention to. In regards to the reliability of the treatment of
the figures, RMT knows me and surely she is aware of the fact that my approach is
as meticulous and serious as it was when I directed the literacy campaign
“Monseñor Leonidas Proaño” in 1988-1989, under the leadership of Alfredo Vera,
who was Minister of Education at the time. RMT also worked in this literacy
campaign as the director of pedagogy. It would seem as if when it comes to judging
the program, for RMT the 160.000 students that had a life-altering experience
through their participation in it, or the 11.000 literacy instructors that went all the
way to inaccessible areas, simply never existed.

3. Finally, there is RMT’s concern about why is it “assumed that all those who register
and perhaps complete a program are literate, without an evaluation to prove that this
is actually true.” I simply have to say that this concern is out of place because the
study itself already recognizes this limitation, and it does so clearly. In fact, all
economically feasible means of measuring illiteracy rates, anywhere the world, have
limitations. So, for example, surveys or even population censuses have a
disadvantage when it comes to measuring illiteracy rates, because they are simply
based on the self-declarations given by the people being surveyed or censused. This
only means that the information offered by this projection is tentative, and it has to
be confirmed by future measurements, such as “quality of life” surveys and
population censuses. Because facts speak louder than words, we continue to work
on the national program of basic education for youth and adults.

Something that RMT does not mention, and it is appropriate to point it out here, is that
the Ministry of Education does not consider basic literacy to be the final goal for adults
and youth in need of these programs. On the contrary, we believe that this is only the
first of the many steps in the permanent growth and continuous improvement of the
citizens' level of education. In fact, in the following months we will continue to work
with the purpose of reducing the already low illiteracy rate even more. By 2012 we
would like to have reached a new goal: to provide education to the adults who have
already completed the literacy program, in order for them to reach a stage of education
equivalent to least the general basic education level.

Through this message, I would like to encourage the members of this Forum, as well as
all those who are interested in reaching our shared educational goals, to pool your
efforts and support our work based on the Ten Year Educational Plan, which was
ratified by the Ecuadorian citizens on November 26th, 2006. Hopefully RMT, who has
so many theoretical writings on the adult education field, will decide to contribute with
our current efforts. Far from not wanting to admit mistakes, we stress that the best way
to contribute to this process is through constructive criticism and active participation.

Cordially,

Raúl Vallejo Corral

Minister of Education
www.raulvallejo.com