Peru's results show that the slope for rural resource quality is greater than that of urban resource quality in all three subject areas, although not this is not as noticeable as it was in other countries. Resource quality has a greater impact on PISA scores in rural areas in comparison to urban areas. Regression results show that the slope is greatest in reading for rural areas of Peru, and is smallest in science. In accordance with our regression results for Latin America in general, we believe this is due to the fact that reading does not require as many resources as science, and therefore even a small increase in quality can greatly impact academic achievement in reading.
The more gentle urban slope shows that improvements to resource quality do not have as great of an impact on PISA scores. We believe this is due to the many other factors that are improved in urban areas, as described in the regression results for Latin America. The fact that the slopes do not differ as greatly in Peru makes us question why resource quality is almost just as important in urban areas as it is in rural areas. Peru is one of the poorest countries in the region in terms of GDP per capita. Peru also scores at the bottom of every subject in relation to every country that participated in PISA 2012. Therefore, it seems that every child in Peru is receiving a poor quality education, not just those in rural areas. Resource quality would thus impact scores relatively equally across the nation. |