Inequality of Education in Indonesia by Gender, Socioeconomic Background and Government Expenditure

Education plays an important role in improving the quality of human resources capable of encouraging economic and social development. Education is also one of the goals of the sustainable development goals in increasing the quantity and quality of human resources continuously which must be carried out equitably and accessible to all without education, geographical, social and economic status. However, the issue of education inequality has recently become a serious concern both at the provincial and district or city levels. This study aims to analyze the factors that influence educational inequality in Indonesia in 2019 and 2020. The analytical method in this study uses panel data regression with 5 equation models. The results show that gender inequality and education budgets can reduce educational inequality.


INTRODUCTION
Education plays an important role in promoting economic and social development, as well as improving the quality of human resources through quality of life. Education is the basis for improving the quality of human resources and ensuring economic and social development (Todaro and Smith, 2000). Education is one of the targets of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2030, namely ensuring the quality of inclusive and equitable education and increasing lifelong learning opportunities for all. The importance of education was also emphasized in the preamble of the 1945 Constitution and has become one of the national ideals and the ideals of the nation's life. Given the central role of education, Therefore, it is important to continue to increase the quantity and quality of education so that it can be carried out evenly and can be accessed by everyone without educational restrictions, geographical conditions, social and economic status. However, the issue of education inequality has recently become a worrying concern both at the provincial and district or city levels. One indicator that can be used to describe inequality and equity in educational attainment among residents of a region is the Gini coefficient of education. According to Thomas et al (2000), the educational Gini index close to 1 indicates a higher inequality in educational attainment. Meanwhile, if it is close to 0, it indicates a lower educational inequality. An overview of educational inequality in 34 provinces of Indonesia can be seen in Figure 1. below: Based on these data, educational attainment among provinces in Indonesia has not yet been fully felt or accessed, especially by people in Eastern Indonesia such as Papua, where the level of educational inequality is very high compared to other provinces.
Education is the main capital for humans to prosper. The importance of the role of education in improving welfare demands the need for equal distribution of education in each region regardless of socio-economic background, gender and race. In equal distribution of education, it is necessary to know the factors that influence educational inequality, such as gender inequality, the percentage of the population who have a school diploma (Elementary, Middle School, High School and University), the education budget, the percentage of the poor, income inequality and GRDP per capita. Equality in education is a matter of how the education system can provide the widest possible education opportunities for all citizens which are the responsibility of all parties, including the central government and local governments. The gender gap in education shows a gap between women and men in obtaining benefits from education (Nugroho, 2011). The gender gap in education is still widening. This leads to the unfortunate situation that often occurs with girls especially from low-income families, where they often face very difficult choices. Todaro and Smith (2011) argue that in most developing countries, young women are less educated than men. In much of the world, girls still lag behind boys. The majority of people who are illiterate and out of school in developing countries are women. Based on data from BPS, the population aged 10 years and over who are illiterate is 2.32 percent for men and 4.92 percent for women. So it can be concluded that the gender gap in education between women and men in Indonesia in 2020 is 2.6 years. Reducing the gender gap in the education sector is needed to address educational inequality. Previous research conducted by (Sholikhah et al., 2014;Harahap et al., 2020) showed that the greater the gender inequality, the higher the level of educational inequality. However, the results of this study are different from the research conducted by (Hamzah et al., 2017;Banzragch et al., 2019) which showed that gender inequality has a negative relationship with educational inequality. Todaro and Smith (2011) find that the provision of educational institutions is limited by the level of public spending. More government funding for education will improve facilities, access and quality of education in order to increase the level of education. The government can increase the capacity of human resources and the productive capacity of the nation through education. Based on research conducted by (Amin et al., 2020;Hamzah et al., 2017;Bustomi, 2012) the education budget has a negative and significant effect on educational inequality. This means that the greater the budget issued by the government for the education sector, the greater the education inequality in a region. However, the results of this study are different from the research conducted by (Adiningtyas & Budyanra, 2020;Banunu, 2021) Another factor that causes inequality in education is the high income inequality that occurs in the community. The condition where the distribution of income received by the community is uneven, so that there is a difference between people who earn high and low incomes. Todaro and Smith (2011) show that there is a positive relationship between education level and income level. The higher the education inequality achieved by the population of a region, the higher the income inequality. The results of previous studies which state that income inequality causes educational inequality, the results of the study (Harahapet al., 2020) show that income inequality has a positive and significant influence on inequality, The higher the income inequality, the smaller the opportunity for people to access education. However, this is different from the research conducted (Bustomi, 2012) which concluded that income inequality has no effect and has a negative coefficient value on educational inequality.
Poverty is also one of the factors that influence inequality in education. Poverty has a large enough impact on demand and school enrollment rates where the education level of the poor will be low. Poverty and inequality in education A person can be said to be poor or living below the poverty line if income or access to goods and services is relatively low. In absolute terms, a person is said to be poor if his income or standard of living is really below the poverty line (Harahap et al., 2020). Several previous studies related to the effect of poverty on educational inequality that have been studied by (Adiningtyas & Budyanra, 2020;Banunu, 2021;Harahap et al., 2020;Soejoto et al., 2016) show that poverty has a positive effect on educational inequality. That is, the poorer an area, the higher the educational inequality. This happens because of the economic factors of poor families. Children from poor families have few opportunities to go to school because they prefer to help their parents in meeting the economic needs of the family rather than continuing their education. Thus, educational inequality between community groups will be even greater.
There have been many previous studies examining the factors that influence educational inequality. However, there are not many studies that use social and economic variables on educational inequality in one research scope. So this study aims to identify the variables of gender inequality, education budget, percentage of poor people, income inequality, GRDP per capita and percentage of population who have a school diploma on educational inequality in 34 provinces in Indonesia in 2019 and 2020. So what is expected from this research can be used as policy recommendations from social and economic factors in reducing educational inequality in Indonesia and can be achieved in accordance with the 2030 SDGs target.

METHODS
This study aims to analyze the factors that influence educational inequality in 34 provinces of Indonesia in 2019 and 2020. The type of data used in this study is quantitative data in the form of secondary data obtained from the publications of the Central Statistics Agency. This study processes data from the dependent variable of the Gini Index of education as a variable of income inequality. While the independent variables used are gender inequality, education budget, percentage of the poor, income inequality, GRDP per capita and the percentage of the population who have a school diploma (elementary, junior high, high school and college). Baseline controls and additional controls variables as elements that do not change during the experiment. In other words, the control variable is a stimulus variable that makes it easier for researchers to understand the variables being tested. The data analysis used in this research is the panel data regression method with the following equation model: The operational definition of each variable can be seen in The Gini coefficient on the Lorenz curve, the cumulative expenditure curve compares the distribution of certain variables with the same distribution representing the cumulative percentage of the population GRDP Gross Regional Domestic Product (Thousand Rupiah) The Education Gini Index can be used to determine the level of equity in education. The Gini index ranges from 0 (Perfect Evenness) and 1 (Perfect Inequality). Education Gini Index 0,7 = very high inequality, Education Gini index 0,5 -0,7 = high inequality, Education Gini index 0,36 -0,49 = moderate inequality, Education Gini index 0,2 -0,35 inequality low, and Education Gini Index less than 0,2 = Very low inequality (Todaro, 2011).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The selection of the best model in the panel data regression method consists of 3 models, namely the Common Effect Model (CEM), Fixed Effect Model (FEM) and Random Effect Model (REM). The best model was selected through the Chow Test and Hausman Test. This study has followed the steps to select the best model, and concluded that the appropriate model is the Fixed Effect Model (FEM). As shown in Table 2, two tests state that FEM is the best model.  (2021) Classical assumption testing is carried out with several tests, namely: 1. Normality test; based on the regression results, it was found that the Jarque-Berratetest (0.8306) is less than (<) the Chi-Square table value (76.78), so the conclusion is that the data is normally distributed. 2. Multicollinearity test; Based on the regression results, it was found that the Correlation Matrix value between the independent variables was less than (<) 0,8, so the conclusion was that there was no multicollinearity condition between the independent variables. 3. Test of heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation; based on the data showing that the probability result is greater than the alpha value (0.05), it can be concluded that there is no heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation condition. The data in this study have met the criteria that are in accordance with the data research mechanism by being proven to have no data disturbances in the classical assumption test. Estimated panel data with Fixed Effect Model as follows:  Table 4. presents the main results of the panel data estimation of the fixed effect model (based on the Hausman specification test) which consists of many models. In education inequality, econometric estimates show similar findings to (Hamzah et al., 2017;Baloch et al., 2017;Banzragch et al., 2019) of evidence of a relationship between factors influencing educational inequality in Indonesia. Models 1, 2, and 4 show negative and significant results in gender inequality on educational inequality and models 3 and 5 show negative and insignificant results. This shows that the higher the gender inequality, the higher the education inequality.
The econometric estimation of the education budget on education inequality shows similar findings to (Sholikhah et al., 2014) Models 1 and 4 of the education budget show positive and insignificant results on education inequality. A positive sign of educational inequality means an increase in educational inequality. This shows that the education budget provided by the government is still not optimal and can be evenly accessed by the community, especially by the poor and geographical conditions between regions that are difficult to access education services. Meanwhile, model 5 of the education budget shows negative and insignificant results on education inequality. The higher the education budget that is allocated to the community and can be accessed and optimized, it will have an impact on reducing educational inequality. These results are similar to research (Adiningtyas & Budyanra, 2020;Banunu, 2021). The education budget in 34 Indonesian provinces in 2020 can be seen in the following quadrant image: . Shows provincial groups by education budget and education inequality as measured by the Education Gini Index. Quadrant 1 is a group of provinces with very high education budgets, but relatively large educational inequality. There are no provinces in Quadrant I. Quadrant II is a group of provinces with relatively low education budgets, coupled with large educational inequality. The province in Quadrant II is Papua Province. Quadrant III is a group of provinces with relatively low education budgets, but relatively even inequality in education. Provinces in Quadrant III include DKI Jakarta, West Java, Central Java, Yogyakarta, East Java, Banten, Bali, South Sulawesi and Southeast Sulawesi, South Sumatra, Aceh, North Sumatra, West Sumatra, Jambi, Bengkulu, Lampung, Bangka Belitung Island, West Kalimantan, Central Kalimantan, Central Sulawesi, West Nusa Tenggara, West Papua, Riau, Riau Islands, East Kalimantan and South Kalimantan. Quadrant IV is a group of provinces with relatively high education budgets and fairly even distribution of education. Provinces in Quadrant IV include Gorontalo, North Sulawesi, North Kalimantan, East Nusa Tenggara, West Sulawesi, North Moluccos and Moluccos.
The government budget for education spread across 34 provinces in Indonesia which is given to each province is still not evenly distributed, this can be seen based on the group of provinces that have relatively low and relatively high education budgets. Provinces that need to be considered are those in Quadrant II, namely Papua Province which has a low education budget and very high educational inequality compared to other provinces. This is caused by several factors; First, it is still difficult for the poor to access education services. Second, culturally the population is very tied to their culture so they are not easy to accept change. Third, structurally, natural conditions such as people living in the hills and far from the reach of government services are still difficult to access education services. Fourth, the limitations of educational facilities and infrastructure, both in terms of the limitations of teachers and the lack of supporting facilities such as transportation.

Baseline Controls
Model 4 poverty has a positive and significant impact on educational inequality. The higher the poverty rate, the higher the educational inequality. This condition occurs because when the poor prioritize work to meet the economic needs of their families rather than continuing their education. These results are in line with research (Adiningtyas & Budyanra, 2020;Banunu , 2021;Harahap et al., 2020;Soejoto et al., 2016). While Model 2 has a significant negative effect and models 1 and 5 show negative and insignificant results on educational inequality.
Models 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 show that GRDP per capita has a positive and significant effect on educational inequality. The positive effect shows that the role of income per capita is not so important in efforts to reduce educational inequality. The results of this study are in line with research conducted by (Soejoto, et al. 2016).
Model 2 shows that income inequality has a positive and significant effect on educational inequality. A positive sign indicates that income inequality can lead to high levels of educational inequality. This is because people with low incomes have limited access to education compared to people with high incomes. These results are in line with the research conducted by (Harahap et al., 2020). Model 5 shows a positive and insignificant relationship to educational inequality.

Additional Controls
Models 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 show that education at the elementary, junior high, high school, and college levels has a negative and significant effect on educational inequality. That is, the higher the education, the lower the educational inequality. Achieving basic to tertiary education can increase the opportunity to earn higher incomes and can improve people's quality of life. The results of this study are similar to the research conducted by Digdowiseiso (2010) which was adapted from the research of Thomas (2000). According to him, the average length of schooling tends to reduce educational inequality. This means that the higher a person's education, it can reduce educational inequality.

CONCLUSIONS
Education is a central role in improving the quality of human resources that are able to encourage economic and social development which is the ideal of the nation's life to achieve prosperity. There have been many studies that discuss this issue related to addressing educational inequality. However, there are not many studies that examine educational inequality by combining various variables that affect educational inequality such as educational, social and economic factors in one research scope. On the other hand, the achievement of inclusive and equitable education for all communities is one of the targets in achieving the SDGs goals which are targeted to be achieved in 2030. With the increasing importance of achieving education that is equally accessible to all communities.
The role of the government is very decisive for educational attainment in Indonesia, especially in expanding access to education for all residents equally regardless of social, economic and political status. Improving educational facilities and infrastructure such as the availability of educators, adequate school facilities and taking into account the geographical and cultural conditions of the local community in accepting changes in the field of education, especially for remote areas which are very difficult to reach in accessing educational services.