Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Suspicious-Feeling-1 t1_j2b7pqo wrote

Think the visualization is well done, I'm just not sure the underlying data is that interesting. It seems like there's no correlation between your two metrics, and we're also really just comparing the top performers. I didn't get much out of this other than a list of the top countries by primary school teachers per capita (is this even a great metric? Wouldn't per student make more sense? What about secondary and tertiary?)

11

UsandoFXOS OP t1_j2b8yuz wrote

Yes... it would be better to have used number of primary students, instead of total inhabitants. I will try to redo it later with this modification.

You must understand that it's not quite easy to find that data. If you visit the unesco database where i take from the data, there are rar missings like for example Canada number of teachers !? So, i can imagine that it will be more difficult to get the number of primary students.

But i would like it. Sure. Thanks for note it.

Responding to your first question: in education science is quite relevant the number of teachers per student. This was my target to explorer.

For me, the most unexpected result is that in this top-20 there is countries of any continent and size. This rarely happen with other "market metrics". I've curiosity to see the rank using the number of students instead the number of inhabitants. I suspect that it will not be so many differences. It only will be more accurate.

It could be possible instead, to apply a correction factor using the "life expectancy" too. Because in countries with more life expectancy, the % of students is lower per inhabitant than in countries with less life expectancy.

Thanks again.

2

UsandoFXOS OP t1_j2b9hvc wrote

Hey man, i've found that in this unesco database there exists numbers of primary school enrolled students by country 😁

😅 ... what a pain "re-do" now all the calculations and graphs

Let me one hour more of time... 🤔

2

UsandoFXOS OP t1_j2b2k82 wrote

Source data: http://data.uis.unesco.org/

Statistical data: varies by country, from 2018 to 2021

Statistical adjustment: i used the average of the last 2 years data for each country, because i have seen that the number of teachers can vary easily 10% from one year to another, sometimes up and sometimes down. I filtered countries with more than 1 million inhabitants.

Software: LibreOffice Calc.

3

Important_Sound5151 t1_j2bdxyp wrote

Instead of belittling the publication, and you all seem to know a lot, I would suggest you publish the accurate data on the “so-called” First World countries, then a comparison could be made between his and your research. Insulting the publisher about his competence in English language is just a “cheap shot”.

2

UsandoFXOS OP t1_j2bfhck wrote

Thanks a lot. I appreciate your support. And yes, i also find quite annoying to be surrounded by so many "wise" people, always prepared to punctuate the alien work.

But said that, i really appreciate some of the "constructive comments". I will improve my english version of the title of the graph, and i also i'm working to redo the graph using the number of primary school students instead total inhabitants, per calculate the ratio of "teachers per capita".

In this point it was a fail of me... wanting to go too much fast 😔 i've discovered that in that UNESCO database there is the data of how many enrolled students are per country and school level 😁

Indeed, please, do you know if i must do a NEW PUBLICATION or can i modify this one "replacing one graph by the new one"? I mean that i would prefer this one delete it. But i'm not very friend of "delete nothing" (as a general rule). I think that the history of the things is important to exist too.

What do you think? (thanks in advance!)

1

Important_Sound5151 t1_j2c41xa wrote

Yes, you can. Philosophical doubt is a critical part of research. We change based on the current, relevant, or reliable information when it comes available .

2

Important_Sound5151 t1_j2byhma wrote

I am an ardent follower of research studies, especially educational research. I believe the push came about because you opened a “bag of alligators” when you subtly highlighted the shortcomings of the North American’s educational system. Many Americans know there is an acute shortage of qualified teachers, so to deny this is an insult to many of us intelligence. Although the data appears screwed, the result corresponds with the trends. That’s why a systematic review study is needed to validate the data. Furthermore, most of the countries you listed have free tuition for college students unlike the United States which has paid tuition. This confounding variable makes a big difference because it can impact the data. The followup review study must be comprehensive and footnotes are highly important to explain gaps in data.

2

UsandoFXOS OP t1_j2c0rgd wrote

Thank you for a such an smart and insightful comment.

I know that most of reddit users are from USA, so usually i publish some kind of statistical graph with a world ranking where this country doesn't appear very well, i receive picky extra reviews 😅

About teacher ratios and what you commented, i have a question: in USA people has not the possibility to access to a FREE PUBLIC SCHOOL in the ELEMENTARY (PRIMARY) SCHOOL? I would have say yes.

Furthermore, maybe you're also a bit confused regarding for example education on europe: there are too a lot of PRIVATE (paid) educational centers. For example, in Spain there is 32% of schools that are private.

I mention this because the explanation you gave for USA i think that doesn't explain all. Even, let me add this: in the public universities (FREE) in Barcelona (where i studied) there were LESS STUDENTS PER TEACHER than in the private universities (PAID), for the same study course. I can say it because i changed from one to another just in the middle of the course, by money problem.

So, i don't have so clear that paid school means more teachers for same students. There are probably a range of diversity. As you said, it deserves a more deep research. Yeah.

Thanks for be there 😀

1

LanewayRat t1_j2b55sq wrote

What do you mean “more”? More than what? More than the next country on the scale?

And how does the population relate? What is the point of presenting these two things on the same graph when “teachers per thousand inhabitants” is already taking into account population?

1

UsandoFXOS OP t1_j2b6a2x wrote

It's a RELATIVE metric (X things each Y population). In education science is quite relevant the number of teachers by pupil.

Certainly, it would find quite more convenient to calculate this relative metric using "number of children with primary school age" instead of "total inhabitants". But usually these both metrics are quite related. But i know that it's not the same. For example, for countries with more old people it probably the % of children is lower than countries with a lower life expectancy.

Mmmm... maybe i could apply a "fix factor" using the life expectancy for each country (i collected it for previous graphs i done this month).

So, consider this a "first version" 😁

2

LanewayRat t1_j2b8ts6 wrote

I’m getting the idea that English is not your first language. So your title should say, “Top 20 countries with the highest number of primary school teachers per thousand inhabitants”.

Yes, there doesn’t seem to be a relationship between population and your measure. If you are actually interested in the teacher:student ratio in a classroom this doesn’t even get you close.

Notice that the UESCO data is focussed on developing nations. Many advanced nations are missing from the data. This makes the “top 20” idea flawed because it’s not top 20 in the world just top 20 in the patchy data.

2

UsandoFXOS OP t1_j2bae5b wrote

I take a look just a couple minutes ago to the same UNESCO database and i've found there exist numbers of students enrolled by school level and country. So i will redo now the graph (let me one hour work 😅).

In that database i've found "ALMOST ALL" countries except a few pacific and caribbean "island-states" and the big (and strange) absence are Canada and Australia.

And yes, you're right, english is not my first language. I take note of your suggested title. Thanks a lot!

1

UsandoFXOS OP t1_j2b74lr wrote

Also, it would be interesting to take in account how many years does primary school last. Usually there is 1-2 years of difference between countries. Sometimes begin a year before and sometimes a year later, and the same happens to finish it.

So, i realize that it's not a so significant metric.

But, man, take a look to the unesco database where i take the data from... there are countries (like Canada!!) without data about primary school teacheres 😮 so... starting from there, you can't expect to get very accurate images about these "international comparatives".

1

UsandoFXOS OP t1_j2bhaaj wrote

Thanks to some suggestions below (in other comments) i'm redoing the graph calculation the ratio of teachers per capita using the number of primary school enrolled students instead of the total of inhabitants of each country.

Please help. I need to know which is the best way to replace this current posted graph by the new one. Must i delete this post and publish the new one? Or must/can i modify this publication?

Thanks in advance.

1

UsandoFXOS OP t1_j2by4tf wrote

Hello. After some suggestions of other users, i've redo this graph using the number of primary students instead of the number of total inhabitants per each country.

The new graph is here: https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/zzjcgj/oc_top_20_countries_with_the_highest_number_of/

I'm a newbie publishing here, so please don't hesitate to let me know the best way to "update" an already published graph, like now. Thanks for your help.

1