The entrance examination reduces the stall at the higher level

We talk a lot about the inefficiency of our public universities, where few professionals are graduates, or who are used as large parking lots where students spend years and years without a degree. Similarly, almost 50% of students finish the year with only one or no material, which increases the time required for graduation, or just over three out of ten. Well, it's true and with which we live for decades.

However, what seems to be ignored is that this inefficiency is the product of the very nature of the chosen income model. Just introduce the high school diploma, register, and automatically, with the pride and social prestige that means to be part of the upper level, the new student candidate is welcome. Of course, some details also lack, namely that the student studies, makes an effort and that he attends clbades. And here is a first problem. It turns out that the ease of entry makes desertion something quite natural, let's say. You are not a student simply by entering. For example, many who have registered have never attended or stopped attending before the first part, or may have been transferred to another institution of the system and have not retreated. . So, in general, we would overestimate the number of students who would not have pbaded a subject each year.

On the other hand, it is well known that the desgranamiento of university students occurs during the first year, a characteristic that crosses not only the country but the vast majority of the world's systems. In Argentina, about 30% of total dropping out occurs in the first two quarters of the study. Several factors explain it.

The causes Lack of motivation, problems of equivalence between subjects, problems of manpower, career change or problems with a teacher, for example. It is a period of adaptation. And such an adaptation, in an open-door system like the one we have, occurs in the first year. It is therefore logical to think, if we compare ourselves with the elite universities of the world without taking into account this detail, that we are not doing well. But what is not right is to compare with models where there is strict control over income. Think of Harvard, a university that gives itself the "luxury" of rejecting 93 candidates out of 100. Achieves a graduation rate of 97%. Or without going so far, land in Chile.

Chile and Harvard case. In its most prestigious public institution, the University of Chile, nearly seven out of ten students graduate. But, to enter the public universities of the neighboring country, it is necessary to pbad a very rigorous entrance exam called the University Selection Test (PSU). This implies that the applicant pbades four knowledge tests for two days. In short, in both cases, Harvard and "Chile", the selection is made outside the system, before the entrance of the student to the university, a feature that significantly reduces the rates of Dropping out of school. But back to what happens to us.

At home. In Argentine national universities, only about 3 in 10 students complete their studies. But, unlike at the University of Chile and Harvard, the selection of candidates is made implicitly in the first year of the course. Something similar happens in one of the most recognized universities in the world. Few people may know that in the remarkable Sorbonne less than four out of ten students complete their studies. This is not surprising since, as in Argentine public universities, the Sorbonne has unrestricted revenues. Thus, the low graduation rate among us and the French would not be the problem but the natural result of the chosen selection mechanism. But let us go a little further in the idea of ​​making comparable, in a way, two revenue models which, in principle, are not.

With this goal, one would think that in a system without access restriction, the first year of the university functions as a major entrance exam. Something like the Chilean PSU. But unlike that, instead of lasting two days, it lasts two semesters. Whether it is ineffective or not, that is how our university system works. Therefore, although statistics indicate that a freshman in an unrestricted entry system is a real student, in reality this is not quite yet. If we use this logic, we see that out of ten students who start the second year after this major exam which was the first, five complete their studies. Now, the percentage of graduates is more in line with what is happening around the world, where graduates on average represent 60% of newcomers. Then, the low rates that Argentina presents and that today surprise us and move us underestimate the "real" rates. But, does this percentage leave us alone and can we sit idly by? I really do not think so.

Besides the fact that about 40% of our young people have not finished high school and therefore see the university by far, the Argentine university system has other weaknesses. One of them is to be the infirmary to treat the wounds with which high school students arrive. But, do not have a diagnostic entry exam and opt for the "enter everything", refuses to check the health of their students and find out what their problems are before entering. And without a great diagnosis to know how they are, there is no treatment possible. In short, if the goal is to increase the number of our graduates, let us know what happened to them before they entered university. But most importantly, for reasons of equity, because people in the most vulnerable are the most affected and, therefore, those that the university expels more quickly.

Case in Latin America

The Argentine, Bolivian and Uruguayan higher education systems are characterized by one thing in common: unrestricted income and high drop-out rates. On the other hand, Chile, Colombia and Ecuador also show similarities, selective entry exams and lower rates of degreasing than those of previous countries. According to the NCES, the agency that centralizes education statistics in the United States, institutions in this country that accept less than 25% of candidates get graduation rates close to 90%, while in the rather selective, about 60% manages to finish. By cons, in the free entry, only 32% complete their studies successfully. The choice of the type of income has predictable results: a free and unrestricted income, a greater number of planned retirements.

* Professor of Economics of Education and Comparative Politics in Higher Education at Torcuato Di Tella University (UTDT). Pedagogical reference of Argentines for Education.