Abstract

The dashboard project collects new data in each country using three new instruments: a School Survey, a Policy Survey, and a Survey of Public Officials. Data collection involves school visits, classroom observations, legislative reviews, teacher and student assessments, and interviews with teachers, principals, and public officials. In addition, the project draws on some existing data sources to complement the new data it collects. A major objective of the GEPD project was to develop focused, cost-effective instruments and data-collection procedures, so that the dashboard can be inexpensive enough to be applied (and re-applied) in many countries. The team achieved this by streamlining and simplifying existing instruments, and thereby reducing the time required for data collection and training of enumerators.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

Schools, teachers, students, public officials

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The aim of the Global Education Policy Dashboard school survey is to produce nationally representative estimates, which will be able to detect changes in the indicators over time at a minimum power of 80% and with a 0.05 significance level. We also wish to detect differences by urban/rural location.

For our school survey, we will employ a two-stage random sample design, where in the first stage a sample of typically around 200 schools, based on local conditions, is drawn, chosen in advance by the Bank staff. In the second stage, a sample of teachers and students will be drawn to answer questions from our survey modules, chosen in the field. A total of 10 teachers will be sampled for absenteeism. Five teachers will be interviewed and given a content knowledge exam. Three 1st grade students will be assessed at random, and a classroom of 4th grade students will be assessed at random. Stratification will be based on the school’s urban/rural classification and based on region. When stratifying by region, we will work with our partners within the country to make sure we include all relevant geographical divisions.

For our Survey of Public Officials, we will sample a total of 200 public officials. Roughly 60 officials are typically surveyed at the federal level, while 140 officials will be surveyed at the regional/district level. For selection of officials at the regional and district level, we will employ a cluster sampling strategy, where roughly 10 regional offices (or whatever the secondary administrative unit is called) are chosen at random from among the regions in which schools were sampled. Then among these 10 regions, we also typically select around 10 districts (tertiary administrative level units) from among the districts in which schools werer sampled. The result of this sampling approach is that for 10 clusters we will have links from the school to the district office to the regional office to the central office. Within the regions/districts, five or six officials will be sampled, including the head of organization, HR director, two division directors from finance and planning, and one or two randomly selected professional employees among the finance, planning, and one other service related department chosen at random. At the federal level, we will interview the HR director, finance director, planning director, and three randomly selected service focused departments. In addition to the directors of each of these departments, a sample of 9 professional employees will be chosen in each department at random on the day of the interview.

Sampling deviation

For our school survey, we select only schools that are supervised by the Minsitry or Education or are Private schools. No schools supervised by the Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Endowments, Ministry of Higher Education , or Ministry of Social Development are included. This left us with a sampling frame containing 3,330 schools, with 1297 private schools and 2003 schools managed by the Minsitry of Education. The schools must also have at least 3 grade 1 students, 3 grade 4 students, and 3 teachers. We oversampled Southern schools to reach a total of 50 Southern schools for regional comparisons. Additionally, we oversampled Evening schools, for a total of 40 evening schools.

A total of 250 schools were surveyed.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

The dashboard project collects new data in each country using three new instruments: a School Survey, a Policy Survey, and a Survey of Public Officials. Data collection involves school visits, classroom observations, legislative reviews, teacher and student assessments, and interviews with teachers, principals, and public officials. In addition, the project draws on some existing data sources to complement the new data it collects. A major objective of the GEPD project was to develop focused, cost-effective instruments and data-collection procedures, so that the dashboard can be inexpensive enough to be applied (and re-applied) in many countries. The team achieved this by streamlining and simplifying existing instruments, and thereby reducing the time required for data collection and training of enumerators.

More information pertaining to each of the three instruments can be found below:

• School Survey: The School Survey collects data primarily on practices (the quality of service delivery in schools), but also on some de facto policy indicators. It consists of streamlined versions of existing instruments—including Service Delivery Surveys on teachers and inputs/infrastructure, Teach on pedagogical practice, Global Early Child Development Database (GECDD) on school readiness of young children, and the Development World Management Survey (DWMS) on management quality—together with new questions to fill gaps in those instruments. Though the number of modules is similar to the full version of the Service Delivery Indicators (SDI) Survey, the number of items and the complexity of the questions within each module is significantly lower. The School Survey includes 8 short modules: School Information, Teacher Presence, Teacher Survey, Classroom Observation, Teacher Assessment, Early Learner Direct Assessment, School Management Survey, and 4th-grade Student Assessment. For a team of two enumerators, it takes on average about 4 hours to collect all information in a given school. For more information, refer to the Frequently Asked Questions.

• Policy Survey: The Policy Survey collects information to feed into the policy de jure indicators. This survey is filled out by key informants in each country, drawing on their knowledge to identify key elements of the policy framework (as in the SABER approach to policy-data collection that the Bank has used over the past 7 years). The survey includes questions on policies related to teachers, school management, inputs and infrastructure, and learners. In total, there are 52 questions in the survey as of June 2020. The key informant is expected to spend 2-3 days gathering and analyzing the relavant information to answer the survey questions.

• Survey of Public Officials: The Survey of Public Officials collects information about the capacity and orientation of the bureaucracy, as well as political factors affecting education outcomes. This survey is a streamlined and education-focused version of the civil-servant surveys that the Bureaucracy Lab (a joint initiative of the Governance Global Practice and the Development Impact Evaluation unit of the World Bank) has implemented in several countries. The survey includes questions about technical and leadership skills, work environment, stakeholder engagement, impartial decision-making, and attitudes and behaviors. The survey takes 30-45 minutes per public official and is used to interview Ministry of Education officials working at the central, regional, and district levels in each country.

Sampling error estimates

The aim of the Global Education Policy Dashboard school survey is to produce nationally representative estimates, which will be able to detect changes in the indicators over time at a minimum power of 80% and with a 0.05 significance level.

Further studies...................................

Abstract

The dashboard project collects new data in each country using three new instruments: a School Survey, a Policy Survey, and a Survey of Public Officials. Data collection involves school visits, classroom observations, legislative reviews, teacher and student assessments, and interviews with teachers, principals, and public officials. In addition, the project draws on some existing data sources to complement the new data it collects. A major objective of the GEPD project was to develop focused, cost-effective instruments and data-collection procedures, so that the dashboard can be inexpensive enough to be applied (and re-applied) in many countries. The team achieved this by streamlining and simplifying existing instruments, and thereby reducing the time required for data collection and training of enumerators.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

Schools, teachers, students, public officials

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The aim of the Global Education Policy Dashboard school survey is to produce nationally representative estimates, which will be able to detect changes in the indicators over time at a minimum power of 80% and with a 0.05 significance level. We also wish to detect differences by urban/rural location. For our school survey, we will employ a two-stage random sample design, where in the first stage a sample of typically around 200 schools, based on local conditions, is drawn, chosen in advance by the Bank staff. In the second stage, a sample of teachers and students will be drawn to answer questions from our survey modules, chosen in the field. A total of 10 teachers will be sampled for absenteeism. Five teachers will be interviewed and given a content knowledge exam. Three 1st grade students will be assessed at random, and a classroom of 4th grade students will be assessed at random. Stratification will be based on the school’s urban/rural classification and based on region. When stratifying by region, we will work with our partners within the country to make sure we include all relevant geographical divisions. For our Survey of Public Officials, we will sample a total of 200 public officials. Roughly 60 officials are typically surveyed at the federal level, while 140 officials will be surveyed at the regional/district level. For selection of officials at the regional and district level, we will employ a cluster sampling strategy, where roughly 10 regional offices (or whatever the secondary administrative unit is called) are chosen at random from among the regions in which schools were sampled. Then among these 10 regions, we also typically select around 10 districts (tertiary administrative level units) from among the districts in which schools werer sampled. The result of this sampling approach is that for 10 clusters we will have links from the school to the district office to the regional office to the central office. Within the regions/districts, five or six officials will be sampled, including the head of organization, HR director, two division directors from finance and planning, and one or two randomly selected professional employees among the finance, planning, and one other service related department chosen at random. At the federal level, we will interview the HR director, finance director, planning director, and three randomly selected service focused departments. In addition to the directors of each of these departments, a sample of 9 professional employees will be chosen in each department at random on the day of the interview.

Sampling deviation

The sample for the Global Education Policy Dashboard in SLE was based in part on a previous sample of 260 schools which were part of an early EGRA study. Details from the sampling for that study are quoted below. An additional booster sample of 40 schools was chosen to be representative of smaller schools of less than 30 learners.

EGRA Details:

"The sampling frame began with the 2019 Annual School Census (ASC) list of primary schools as provided by UNICEF/MBSSE where the sample of 260 schools for this study were obtained from an initial list of 7,154 primary schools. Only schools that meet a pre-defined selection criteria were eligible for sampling.

To achieve the recommended sample size of 10 learners per grade, schools that had an enrolment of at least 30 learners in Grade 2 in 2019 were considered. To achieve a high level of confidence in the findings and generate enough data for analysis, the selection criteria only considered schools that: • had an enrolment of at least 30 learners in grade 1; and • had an active grade 4 in 2019 (enrolment not zero)

The sample was taken from a population of 4,597 primary schools that met the eligibility criteria above, representing 64.3% of all the 7,154 primary schools in Sierra Leone (as per the 2019 school census). Schools with higher numbers of learners were purposefully selected to ensure the sample size could be met in each site.

As a result, a sample of 260 schools were drawn using proportional to size allocation with simple random sampling without replacement in each stratum. In the population, there were 16 districts and five school ownership categories (community, government, mission/religious, private and others). A total of 63 strata were made by forming combinations of the 16 districts and school ownership categories. In each stratum, a sample size was computed proportional to the total population and samples were drawn randomly without replacement. Drawing from other EGRA/EGMA studies conducted by Montrose in the past, a backup sample of up to 78 schools (30% of the sample population) with which enumerator teams can replace sample schools was also be drawn.

In the distribution of sampled schools by ownership, majority of the sampled schools are owned by mission/religious group (62.7%, n=163) followed by the government owned schools at 18.5% (n=48). Additionally, in school distribution by district, majority of the sampled schools (54%) were found in Bo, Kambia, Kenema, Kono, Port Loko and Kailahun districts. Refer to annex 9. for details on the population and sample distribution by district."

Because of the restriction that at least 30 learners were available in Grade 2, we chose to add an additional 40 schools to the sample from among smaller schools, with between 3 and 30 grade 2 students. The objective of this supplement was to make the sample more nationally representative, as the restriction reduced the sampling frame for the EGRA/EGMA sample by over 1,500 schools from 7,154 to 4,597.

The 40 schools were chosen in a manner consistent with the original set of EGRA/EGMA schools. The 16 districts formed the strata. In each stratum, the number of schools selected were proportional to the total population of the stratum, and within stratum schools were chosen with probability proportional to size.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

The dashboard project collects new data in each country using three new instruments: a School Survey, a Policy Survey, and a Survey of Public Officials. Data collection involves school visits, classroom observations, legislative reviews, teacher and student assessments, and interviews with teachers, principals, and public officials. In addition, the project draws on some existing data sources to complement the new data it collects. A major objective of the GEPD project was to develop focused, cost-effective instruments and data-collection procedures, so that the dashboard can be inexpensive enough to be applied (and re-applied) in many countries. The team achieved this by streamlining and simplifying existing instruments, and thereby reducing the time required for data collection and training of enumerators.

More information pertaining to each of the three instruments can be found below: - School Survey: The School Survey collects data primarily on practices (the quality of service delivery in schools), but also on some de facto policy indicators. It consists of streamlined versions of existing instruments—including Service Delivery Surveys on teachers and inputs/infrastructure, Teach on pedagogical practice, Global Early Child Development Database (GECDD) on school readiness of young children, and the Development World Management Survey (DWMS) on management quality—together with new questions to fill gaps in those instruments. Though the number of modules is similar to the full version of the Service Delivery Indicators (SDI) Survey, the number of items and the complexity of the questions within each module is significantly lower. The School Survey includes 8 short modules: School Information, Teacher Presence, Teacher Survey, Classroom Observation, Teacher Assessment, Early Learner Direct Assessment, School Management Survey, and 4th-grade Student Assessment. For a team of two enumerators, it takes on average about 4 hours to collect all information in a given school. For more information, refer to the Frequently Asked Questions.

• Policy Survey: The Policy Survey collects information to feed into the policy de jure indicators. This survey is filled out by key informants in each country, drawing on their knowledge to identify key elements of the policy framework (as in the SABER approach to policy-data collection that the Bank has used over the past 7 years). The survey includes questions on policies related to teachers, school management, inputs and infrastructure, and learners. In total, there are 52 questions in the survey as of June 2020. The key informant is expected to spend 2-3 days gathering and analyzing the relavant information to answer the survey

This dataset tracks annual total students amount from 2009 to 2023 for Therrell School of Law- Government and Public Policy - C

【リソース】Foreward / / AN INTRODUCTION POSTWAR EDUCATIONAL REFORM IN RETROSPECT / 1 The End of the War and Toward the Restoration of Education / 2 An Ideal of the Constitution and the Fundamental Law of Education / 1 Improvement of the Educational System after Peace and Independence / 2 Japan's Economic Growth and Education / 3 A Quarter of a Century since Postwar Educational Reform / 1 Qualitative Improvement and Enhancement of Education / 2 Improvement of Curriculum / 3 Kindergarten Education and Promotion of Special Education / 4 Enhancement of the Qualifications and Abilities of Teachers / 1 National Council on Educational Reform and the Process of its Reform / 2 Inauguration of National Commission on Educational Reform / Section 1: Present State of Education in Japan / Section 2: Perspective of Educational Reform / 1 Fostering Japanese People with a Rich Sense of Humanity / 2 Develop the Talent of Individuals and Foster Creative Individuals / 3 Create New Schools for the New Age / Section 3: Promotion of the Education Reform Plan for the 21st Century / Section 4: Formulation of the Basic Promotion Plan for Education and Consideration of the New Fundamental Law of Education / 1 Life of Children / 2 Current State of Problem Behavior by Students / 3 Recent Juvenile Delinquency and Crimes Victimizing Young People / 1 Basic Approach to Policy Measures / 2 Outlines of Policy Measures and Problems Involved / 3 Future Issues and Challenges / Section 1: Present State of Learning and Academic Ability for the Future / 1 Research on Curriculum / 2 International Research on Mathematics and Science Education / 3 PISA by OECD / 4 Survey on Attitudes to School Education / 1 Fundamental Ideas of New Courses of Study / 2 Outline of the New Courses of Study / 3 Realizing the Aim of the New Courses of Study / 3_1 Basic Idea / 3_2 Outline of Measures and Issues / 4-1 Basic Idea / 4_2 Outline of Measures and Issues / Chapter4 SCHOOL-BUILDING FOR THE NEW TIMES / 1 Independent and Active Local Educational Administration / 2 Establishment of School Autonomy and Self-discipline / 2_1 Basic Idea / 2 Outline of Measures / 3 For Further Improvements of the Quality of Teachers / Chapter5 BUILDING A DISTINGUISHED UNIVERSITY IN THE TIMES OF INTELLECT / (1) More Flexible Structure of Educational and Research System / (2) Turning National Universities into Newly Independent Administrative Institutions / (1) Self-monitoring and Self-evaluation / (2) Reorganization of National Institution for Academic Degrees for University Evaluation / (3) Establishment of a Multiple Evaluation System / 3 More Job Mobility among Teachers, etc. / 1_1 Basic Concepts / 2 New Developments / 2_1 Basic Concepts / 2 Situation Concerning the Promotion of Principal Measures / Chapter7 NEW INITIATIVE FOR EDUCATIONAL REFORM TAKEN BY LOCAL COMMUNITIES / Section 1: Programs by the National Government / 1 Programs Initiated by Local Governments / 2 Initiatives for Educational Reform from Citizens / 1 Educational Reform Developments in Foreign Countries / 2 Background to Educational Reform / 3 Objectives of Educational Reform / 1 Lifelong Learning / 2 Elementary and Secondary Education / 3 Higher Education / 4 Informatization of Education / 文部科学白書は、文部科学省の所管行政全体に関する情報を広く国民へ提供するために、旧文部省と旧科学技術庁が統合した平成１３年から刊行されているもの。【キーワード】スポーツ / 教育 / 文化 / 白書_年次報告

Interest group scholars have struggled to document whether and how interest groups impact policy outcomes. At the same time, large, powerful vested interests like teachers’ unions have been accused of getting in the way of policy change, despite a lack of consistent evidence. This dissertation uses the case of education reform to disentangle the role of different types of interest groups in U.S. state policymaking. Through four essays, this dissertation shows that interest group power comes in multiple forms, that interest groups benefit where they have legislative allies, and that interest competition impacts policy. Bucking the conventional wisdom that, as the strongest interest group in education, teachers’ unions’ preferences dictate education policy outcomes, I show that teachers’ unions most strongly impact those policies that affect them organizationally. For other policies, however, other groups matter more. I show that education reform groups use information and assistance, while philanthropic foundations use funding to state bureaucracies to further policies that teachers’ unions oppose.

Abstract

The dashboard project collects new data in each country using three new instruments: a School Survey, a Policy Survey, and a Survey of Public Officials. Data collection involves school visits, classroom observations, legislative reviews, teacher and student assessments, and interviews with teachers, principals, and public officials. In addition, the project draws on some existing data sources to complement the new data it collects. A major objective of the GEPD project was to develop focused, cost-effective instruments and data-collection procedures, so that the dashboard can be inexpensive enough to be applied (and re-applied) in many countries. The team achieved this by streamlining and simplifying existing instruments, and thereby reducing the time required for data collection and training of enumerators.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

Schools, teachers, students, public officials

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The aim of the Global Education Policy Dashboard school survey is to produce nationally representative estimates, which will be able to detect changes in the indicators over time at a minimum power of 80% and with a 0.05 significance level. We also wish to detect differences by urban/rural location.

For our school survey, we will employ a two-stage random sample design, where in the first stage a sample of typically around 200 schools, based on local conditions, is drawn, chosen in advance by the Bank staff. In the second stage, a sample of teachers and students will be drawn to answer questions from our survey modules, chosen in the field. A total of 10 teachers will be sampled for absenteeism. Five teachers will be interviewed and given a content knowledge exam. Three 1st grade students will be assessed at random, and a classroom of 4th grade students will be assessed at random. Stratification will be based on the school’s urban/rural classification and based on region. When stratifying by region, we will work with our partners within the country to make sure we include all relevant geographical divisions.

For our Survey of Public Officials, we will sample a total of 200 public officials. Roughly 60 officials are typically surveyed at the federal level, while 140 officials will be surveyed at the regional/district level. For selection of officials at the regional and district level, we will employ a cluster sampling strategy, where roughly 10 regional offices (or whatever the secondary administrative unit is called) are chosen at random from among the regions in which schools were sampled. Then among these 10 regions, we also typically select around 10 districts (tertiary administrative level units) from among the districts in which schools werer sampled. The result of this sampling approach is that for 10 clusters we will have links from the school to the district office to the regional office to the central office. Within the regions/districts, five or six officials will be sampled, including the head of organization, HR director, two division directors from finance and planning, and one or two randomly selected professional employees among the finance, planning, and one other service related department chosen at random. At the federal level, we will interview the HR director, finance director, planning director, and three randomly selected service focused departments. In addition to the directors of each of these departments, a sample of 9 professional employees will be chosen in each department at random on the day of the interview.

Sampling deviation

Overall, we draw a sample of 300 public schools from each of the regions of Ethiopia. As a comparison to the total number of schools in Ethiopia, this consistutes an approximately 1% sample. Because of the large size of the country, and because there can be very large distances between Woredas within the same region, we chose a cluster sampling approach. In this approach, 100 Woredas were chosen with probability proportional to 4th grade size. Then within each Woreda two rural and one urban school were chosen with probability proportional to 4th grade size.

Because of conflict in the Tigray region, an initial set of 12 schools that were selected had to be trimmed to 6 schools in Tigray. These six schools were then distributed to other regions in Ethiopia.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

The dashboard project collects new data in each country using three new instruments: a School Survey, a Policy Survey, and a Survey of Public Officials. Data collection involves school visits, classroom observations, legislative reviews, teacher and student assessments, and interviews with teachers, principals, and public officials. In addition, the project draws on some existing data sources to complement the new data it collects. A major objective of the GEPD project was to develop focused, cost-effective instruments and data-collection procedures, so that the dashboard can be inexpensive enough to be applied (and re-applied) in many countries. The team achieved this by streamlining and simplifying existing instruments, and thereby reducing the time required for data collection and training of enumerators.

More information pertaining to each of the three instruments can be found below:

• School Survey: The School Survey collects data primarily on practices (the quality of service delivery in schools), but also on some de facto policy indicators. It consists of streamlined versions of existing instruments—including Service Delivery Surveys on teachers and inputs/infrastructure, Teach on pedagogical practice, Global Early Child Development Database (GECDD) on school readiness of young children, and the Development World Management Survey (DWMS) on management quality—together with new questions to fill gaps in those instruments. Though the number of modules is similar to the full version of the Service Delivery Indicators (SDI) Survey, the number of items and the complexity of the questions within each module is significantly lower. The School Survey includes 8 short modules: School Information, Teacher Presence, Teacher Survey, Classroom Observation, Teacher Assessment, Early Learner Direct Assessment, School Management Survey, and 4th-grade Student Assessment. For a team of two enumerators, it takes on average about 4 hours to collect all information in a given school. For more information, refer to the Frequently Asked Questions.

• Policy Survey: The Policy Survey collects information to feed into the policy de jure indicators. This survey is filled out by key informants in each country, drawing on their knowledge to identify key elements of the policy framework (as in the SABER approach to policy-data collection that the Bank has used over the past 7 years). The survey includes questions on policies related to teachers, school management, inputs and infrastructure, and learners. In total, there are 52 questions in the survey as of June 2020. The key informant is expected to spend 2-3 days gathering and analyzing the relavant information to answer the survey questions.

• Survey of Public Officials: The Survey of Public Officials collects information about the capacity and orientation of the bureaucracy, as well as political factors affecting education outcomes. This survey is a streamlined and education-focused version of the civil-servant surveys that the Bureaucracy Lab (a joint initiative of the Governance Global Practice and the Development Impact Evaluation unit of the World Bank) has implemented in several countries. The survey includes questions about technical and leadership skills, work environment, stakeholder engagement, impartial decision-making, and attitudes and behaviors. The survey takes 30-45 minutes per public official and is used to interview Ministry of Education officials working at the central, regional, and district levels in each country.

Sampling error estimates

The aim of the Global Education Policy Dashboard school survey is to produce nationally representative estimates, which will be able to detect changes in the indicators over time at a minimum power of 80% and with a 0.05 significance level.

This paper reviews the literature and proposes a latest fastest and cheaper ways of imparting universal quality education at primary school level in developing countries. Literature review shows that blending of e-tools in present way of learning is helpful in improving the standard of education at national and international level. At present time, different ways of learning are available in the world, like: virtual universities, distant education, privately appearing in examinations, online papers etc. According to MDGs report, Goal 2 is: Achieve Universal Primary Education: Ensure that all the boys and girls complete primary school by 2015. It is found that the education and training systems of all the nations make vulnerable the future of millions of the children and of the nation itself. In developing countries villages where schools are available, enrolments are there, in spite of that there is no productivity because there something is lacking in teachers and society. Efforts made by government and donors agencies are encouraging but not enough; it is also found that with available resources by proper innovation and blending with information technology productivity can be improved, so for this a model is proposed , which will be helpful to meet the MDG-2.

Over the past three decades a reform movement bent on improving schools and educational outcomes through standards-based accountability systems and market-like competitive pressures has dominated policy debates. Many have examined reform policies’ effects on academic outcomes, but few have explored these policies’ influence on citizens' political orientations. In this study, using data from an original survey, I examine whether and how No Child Left Behind’s (NCLB) accountability-based architecture influences parents’ attitudes toward government and federal involvement in education. I find little evidence that diversity in parents’ lived policy experiences shapes their political orientations. However, the results of a survey experiment suggest that information linking school experience to policy and government action may increase parents’ confidence in their ability to contribute to the political process. Understanding whether and under what conditions parents use public school experiences to inform orientations toward government can inform the design of future reforms.

【リソース】Foreward / / 1. Expansion of Access to Education / 2. Qualitative Improvement of Education / 3. Movement of Educational Reform / 1. Social Changes and Situation of Children's Lives / 2. Issues of School Education / Chapter 2 Towards Advancement of "Academic Ability" / Section 1 The Kind of "Academic Ability" We Should Strive for Now / 1. ResultsofPreviousStudies / 2. Results of Research on the Curriculum / 3. Roundup and Evaluation of Various Research Results / 1. The new Courses of Study which aims to develop "Academic Ability" / 2. Change to Evaluation Based on How Far the Objectives Have Been Achieved / 1. Efforts by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology / 2. Efforts in Each Schools / Section 5 Toward better curriculum standards / (1) Improvement of experimental schools system / (2) Basic research at the Curriculum Research Center of the National Institute for Educational Policy Research / (3) Permanent organization for curriculum development / Chapter 3 For the Cultivation of "Richness in Mind" / 1. Social Background / 2. To Cultivate "Rich Humanity" / 1. State of Minds and Lives of Children / 2. Growing concerns over the present state of violence, bullying, non-attendance at school, etc. / 1. Fundamental Concept of Measures / 2. Description of the Measures / 1. Improving Qualities and Abilities of Teachers through Integration of Three Factors: Teacher-Training System at University, Recruitment, and In-service Training / 2. Performance Assessments of Teachers and Treatment Which Reflects Their Efforts / 3. Strict Responses to Teachers with Problems in Teaching / 4. Utilization of Excellent Human Resources through Promotion of Participation of Working People / 1. The Establishment of Open Schools - To Achieve Accountability - / 2. Changing Board of Education - Development of the Community-based Education Administration - / 3. Reform of the Compulsory Education System Funded by Tax Revenues and Other Related Systems / 4. Diversifying School Education and Schools in the New Era / 1. Making School Facilities Safer / 2. Crisis Management and Safety Measures of Schools / COLUMN 1 / < Survey on efforts to promote Moral Education > / COLUMN 2 / COLUMN 3 / COLUMN 4 / COLUMN 5 / COLUMN 6 / COLUMN 7 / COLUMN 8 / COLUMN 9 / A Case Introduction_1 / A Case Introduction_2 / 文部科学白書は、文部科学省の所管行政全体に関する情報を広く国民へ提供するために、旧文部省と旧科学技術庁が統合した平成１３年から刊行されているもの。【キーワード】white_paper and annual_report / スポーツ / 教育 / 文化 / 白書_年次報告

• The Ministry of the Interior and Safety publishes the 'Administrative Safety Statistical Yearbook' every year by compiling statistical data from the headquarters of the Ministry of the Interior and Safety and its affiliated organizations in accordance with the 'Ministry of the Interior and Safety Statistics Management Regulations'. - The statistical information by field included in the 'Administrative Safety Statistical Yearbook' is provided as an open API so that it can be used in various fields in both the public and private sectors. - The open API in question is the statistics on 'Local Autonomy Human Resources Development Institute General Education' among 'Others' included in the 'Administrative Safety Statistical Yearbook'. It provides general education statistical information such as the number of courses, sessions, and participants for each long-term education, basic education, specialized policy education, and other education. - In addition, the 'Administrative Safety Statistical Yearbook' can be downloaded in PDF format from the Ministry of the Interior and Safety website at Policy Data > Statistics > Statistical Yearbook/Statistics by Subject.

The data and programs replicate tables and figures from "Crowding in Private Quality: The Equilibrium Effects of Public Spending in Education", by Andrabi, Bau, Das, Karachiwalla, and Khwaja. Please see the README file for additional details.

This policy outlines the requirements for registration as an Education Authority. The policy applies only to the formal stream of education particularly the care facilities, pre-schools, primary and secondary schools: government-funded, government-assisted and private schools.

Beginning with the school year 2006-07, the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004 required school districts participating in the National School Lunch Program or other child nutrition programs to adopt and implement a wellness policy. The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 continued and strengthened this requirement. This study was intended to provide detailed insight into the contents of the congressionally-mandated district wellness policies for school years 2006-07 (first year of the mandate) through 2013-14 (last year of funding-supported data collection). The data file contains coded information about the required wellness policy components, along with other components that are known to contribute to student health and wellness: nutrition education; standards for USDA child nutrition programs and school meals; nutrition standards for competitive and other foods and beverages; physical education; physical activity; staff wellness and modelling; stakeholder involvement; messaging, marketing and promotion; evaluation; and reporting. There is a separate record in the data file for each district, grade level (elementary, middle and high school) and school year combination.

Russia Consolidated Government Expenditure: Year to Date: SC: Education: Youth Policy & Children Health Improvement data was reported at 87.431 RUB bn in Jul 2022. This records an increase from the previous number of 71.819 RUB bn for Jun 2022. Russia Consolidated Government Expenditure: Year to Date: SC: Education: Youth Policy & Children Health Improvement data is updated monthly, averaging 21.642 RUB bn from Jan 2005 (Median) to Jul 2022, with 210 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 106.449 RUB bn in Dec 2021 and a record low of 0.100 RUB bn in Jan 2006. Russia Consolidated Government Expenditure: Year to Date: SC: Education: Youth Policy & Children Health Improvement data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Federal Treasury. The data is categorized under Russia Premium Database’s Government and Public Finance – Table RU.FA004: Consolidated Government Expenditure: ytd.

The NEP 2015–19 is designed to give everyone in Papua New Guinea, regardless of their ability, gender or socio - economic background, an opportunity to be educated and to transform their lives, using an holistic, inclusive and integrated approach.

There have been many changes in the country’s education system and policies since independence 40 years ago. This plan is designed to build on past successes and experience and begin a system providing 13 years Universal Education. High-quality, relevant education and training for all.

This plan is different to previous plans in a number of ways. Firstly it outlines all interventions needed that together will achieve Universal Education in PNG. This National Education Plan intends to have PNG leading the way by taking the bold step towards13 years of Universal Education for every student in the country. Universal Education can be achieved in our country with a coordinated approach supported by strong political drive, quality leadership and a relentlessness to achieve its intent.

Contained in this plan is the outline of the radical and comprehensive overhaul of many aspects of the education system proposed to give all children the opportunity to enter school at the age of six and receive a relevant education for 13 years, until they reach Grade 12 or the equivalent (18 years of age).

The NEP 2015-19 is based on a logic framework, so that the plan itself can be monitored and progressed measured. Every province will play a critical role in implementing the plan and using the same framework, they can compare their progress at provincial and national level. This approach means DoE is transparent in its approach and accountable to achieve its targets.

Abstract

The dashboard project collects new data in each country using three new instruments: a School Survey, a Policy Survey, and a Survey of Public Officials. Data collection involves school visits, classroom observations, legislative reviews, teacher and student assessments, and interviews with teachers, principals, and public officials. In addition, the project draws on some existing data sources to complement the new data it collects. A major objective of the GEPD project was to develop focused, cost-effective instruments and data-collection procedures, so that the dashboard can be inexpensive enough to be applied (and re-applied) in many countries. The team achieved this by streamlining and simplifying existing instruments, and thereby reducing the time required for data collection and training of enumerators.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

Schools, teachers, students, public officials

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The aim of the Global Education Policy Dashboard school survey is to produce nationally representative estimates, which will be able to detect changes in the indicators over time at a minimum power of 80% and with a 0.05 significance level. We also wish to detect differences by urban/rural location. For our school survey, we will employ a two-stage random sample design, where in the first stage a sample of typically around 200 schools, based on local conditions, is drawn, chosen in advance by the Bank staff. In the second stage, a sample of teachers and students will be drawn to answer questions from our survey modules, chosen in the field. A total of 10 teachers will be sampled for absenteeism. Five teachers will be interviewed and given a content knowledge exam. Three 1st grade students will be assessed at random, and a classroom of 4th grade students will be assessed at random. Stratification will be based on the school’s urban/rural classification and based on region. When stratifying by region, we will work with our partners within the country to make sure we include all relevant geographical divisions. For our Survey of Public Officials, we will sample a total of 200 public officials. Roughly 60 officials are typically surveyed at the federal level, while 140 officials will be surveyed at the regional/district level. For selection of officials at the regional and district level, we will employ a cluster sampling strategy, where roughly 10 regional offices (or whatever the secondary administrative unit is called) are chosen at random from among the regions in which schools were sampled. Then among these 10 regions, we also typically select around 10 districts (tertiary administrative level units) from among the districts in which schools were sampled. The result of this sampling approach is that for 10 clusters we will have links from the school to the district office to the regional office to the central office. Within the regions/districts, five or six officials will be sampled, including the head of organization, HR director, two division directors from finance and planning, and one or two randomly selected professional employees among the finance, planning, and one other service related department chosen at random. At the federal level, we will interview the HR director, finance director, planning director, and three randomly selected service focused departments. In addition to the directors of each of these departments, a sample of 9 professional employees will be chosen in each department at random on the day of the interview.

Sampling deviation

In order to visit two schools per day, we clustered at the sector level choosing two schools per cluster. With a sample of 200 schools, this means that we had to allocate 100 PSUs. We combined this clustering with stratification by district and by the urban rural status of the schools. The number of PSUs allocated to each stratum is proportionate to the number of schools in each stratum (i.e. the district X urban/rural status combination).

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

The dashboard project collects new data in each country using three new instruments: a School Survey, a Policy Survey, and a Survey of Public Officials. Data collection involves school visits, classroom observations, legislative reviews, teacher and student assessments, and interviews with teachers, principals, and public officials. In addition, the project draws on some existing data sources to complement the new data it collects. A major objective of the GEPD project was to develop focused, cost-effective instruments and data-collection procedures, so that the dashboard can be inexpensive enough to be applied (and re-applied) in many countries. The team achieved this by streamlining and simplifying existing instruments, and thereby reducing the time required for data collection and training of enumerators.

More information pertaining to each of the three instruments can be found below: - School Survey: The School Survey collects data primarily on practices (the quality of service delivery in schools), but also on some de facto policy indicators. It consists of streamlined versions of existing instruments—including Service Delivery Surveys on teachers and inputs/infrastructure, Teach on pedagogical practice, Global Early Child Development Database (GECDD) on school readiness of young children, and the Development World Management Survey (DWMS) on management quality—together with new questions to fill gaps in those instruments. Though the number of modules is similar to the full version of the Service Delivery Indicators (SDI) Survey, the number of items and the complexity of the questions within each module is significantly lower. The School Survey includes 8 short modules: School Information, Teacher Presence, Teacher Survey, Classroom Observation, Teacher Assessment, Early Learner Direct Assessment, School Management Survey, and 4th-grade Student Assessment. For a team of two enumerators, it takes on average about 4 hours to collect all information in a given school. For more information, refer to the Frequently Asked Questions.

• Policy Survey: The Policy Survey collects information to feed into the policy de jure indicators. This survey is filled out by key informants in each country, drawing on their knowledge to identify key elements of the policy framework (as in the SABER approach to policy-data collection that the Bank has used over the past 7 years). The survey includes questions on policies related to teachers, school management, inputs and infrastructure, and learners. In total, there are 52 questions in the survey as of June 2020. The key informant is expected to spend 2-3 days gathering and analyzing the relavant information to answer the survey questions.

• Survey of Public Officials: The Survey of Public Officials collects information about the capacity and orientation of the bureaucracy, as well as political factors affecting education outcomes. This survey is a streamlined and education-focused version of the civil-servant surveys that the Bureaucracy Lab (a joint initiative of the Governance Global Practice and the Development Impact Evaluation unit of the World Bank) has implemented in several countries. The survey includes questions about technical and leadership skills, work environment, stakeholder engagement, impartial decision-making, and attitudes and behaviors. The survey takes 30-45 minutes per public official and is used to interview Ministry of Education officials working at the central, regional, and district levels in each country.

Cleaning operations

Data quality control was performed in R and Stata Code to calculate all indicators can be found on github here: https://github.com/worldbank/GEPD/blob/master/Countries/Rwanda/2019/School/01_data/03_school_data_cleaner.R

Sampling error estimates

The aim of the Global Education Policy Dashboard school survey is to produce nationally representative estimates, which will be able to detect changes in the indicators over time at a minimum power of 80% and with a 0.05 significance level.

This dataset tracks annual total classroom teachers amount from 2009 to 2023 for Therrell School of Law- Government and Public Policy - C

Data on distance learning and supplemental feeding programs were collected from a stratified sample of 600 school districts. School districts were divided into quartiles based on the percentage of students eligible for free/reduced-price lunch, an indicator of family economic status, as reported by the National Center for Education Statistics (https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/). A simple random sample was taken in each stratum, and sample size per stratum was calculated using 95% confidence interval of 50% ± 10%. Data on the availability and method of delivery of both distance learning and supplemental feeding programs were collected from publicly available announcements on school district websites and their official social media pages (Facebook, Twitter). Google searches were performed for news resources when information was not available from online district sources.

This dataset tracks annual free lunch eligibility from 2009 to 2023 for Therrell School of Law- Government and Public Policy - C vs. Georgia and Atlanta Public Schools School District