Higher Education for Development

An Evaluation of the World Bank Group’s Support

Report to the Board from the Committee on Development Effectiveness

Sub-Committee Report

Meeting of March 27, 2017

The Subcommittee of the Committee on Development Effectiveness met to consider the IEG report Higher Education for Development: An Evaluation of the World Bank Group’s Support(CODE2017-0002), together with Draft World Bank Group Management Response(CODE2017-0014).

The Sub-Committee welcomed IEG’s evaluation and Management’s broad concurrence with the report’s findings and recommendations. They were encouraged to learn that the Bank is already carrying out activities to address the recommendations, including analytical work to have a more policy and country-specific approach. The Committee acknowledged that the WBG has risen to the challenge of the growing demand for higher education in client countries but noted that its contribution could be broader and not only focused on building systems and governance structures. Members highlighted the timeliness of the evaluation, particularly in light of the upcoming World Development Report 2018 “Realizing the Promise of Education for Development”.

Members stressed the importance of making higher educationaffordable to the poor, of enhancing the quality of teaching and learning, and of addressing demand for skilled manpower, particularly in low income developing countries. They noted that equitable access to higher education is one of the drivers of economic growth and poverty reduction, and that learning has to be addressed in connection with the challenges of employability including within changing job markets, high mobility, and the impact of digitization and technological.

The Sub-Committeeencouraged the WBG to carry outa strategic review of its support for higher education and asked ittake into account the quality of primary and secondary education, employment andjob creation,as well as, the relationship between higher education and technical and vocational education. They stressed the need for forward-looking thinking on how to address key issues identified in the evaluation such as finding waysto neutralize undesirable distributional consequences and unintentional marginalization of groups; to improveaccess for the underprivileged and disadvantaged; and, to make higher education affordable for the poor, including attracting donor funding. While much of the WBG’s support has focused on middle-income countries, the Sub- Committee noted that a growing number of low-income countries are increasingly receiving support. They added that while the World Bank and IFC experiences were mostly concentrated in middle-income countries, many lessons could beapplicable to low-income countries.

Members emphasized the need for the Bank and IFC to improve the quality of results indicators, ensure their adequate measurement, and to further build and draw on the evidence base for higher educations. They also noted the relevance of benchmarking learning to improve outcomes by establishing standardized tests and metric for learning outcomes. Additionally, they observed that more impact evaluations of education projects should be considered in the medium and longer terms.

The Committee underscored the need todiversify funding sources and to put in place proper regulatory frameworks to monitor performance and the adequacy of higher education service providers. They urged IFC and the Bank to identify ways to increase the role of the private sector in higher education andto include the input of employers’ perspectives in WB and IFC investments to ensure the desired link to industry competitiveness. They agreed that widerstakeholder participation could help establish coherent policy frameworksand help inform the discussion of how tobridge skills mismatches and address gender gaps.

Members underscored the importance of increasing coordination within the WBG and strengthening the synergies among theEducation Global Practice and other Global Practices.They encouragedManagement to fosterSouth-South cooperation to develop and build curricula, share best practices, student exchange programs, teacher training and posting. They also encouraged management to work closer with other development partners, including the wide range of non-traditional donors.

1

This report is not an approved record.