In 2021/22, education spending per pupil at schools in England was highest in Inner London, with approximately ***** British pounds spent per pupil in this area. By contrast, pupils in the East of England had an expenditure per head of 6,049 pounds, which was the lowest in this academic year.

Out of the OECD countries, Luxembourg was the country that spent the most on educational institutions per full-time student in 2020. On average, 23,000 U.S dollars were spent on primary education, nearly 27,000 U.S dollars on secondary education, and around 53,000 U.S dollars on tertiary education. The United States followed behind, with Norway in third. Meanwhile, the lowest spending was in Mexico.

Revenue in the UK General Secondary Education industry is tied to government funding, and continued support over the past five years has ultimately driven revenue growth. The necessity of secondary education, with it being compulsory to ensure the UK has an educated and skilled population, protects the industry from funding cuts. Additionally, the level of funding is sensitive to pupil numbers, and rising secondary school pupil numbers have encouraged funding hikes. However, while revenue has been climbing, so has inflation. This has placed a strain on school profit levels as they balance necessary spending on energy and wages against income. Overall, in the five years to 2025-26, industry revenue has grown at a compound annual rate of 1.8%. Commitment from the UK government is preventing a revenue decline in 2025-26. The Institute for Fiscal Studies highlights how the core schools’ budget for the year is increasing in cash terms to reach £63.9 billion, allowing spending per pupil to increase by 1.6% in real terms. Furthermore, while the implementation of VAT on school fees in January 2025 has weakened demand for private schools, climbing tuition fees are ultimately helping to contribute to revenue growth, but falling pupil numbers are constraining its potential. However, the IFS expects costs for schools in England to rise by 6.5% in 2025-26, owing to teacher and support staff wage rises and inflation expectations. This is putting pressure on profit in the year. Overall, revenue in 2025-26 is rising by 0.5% to reach £71 billion. Over the five years through to 2030-31 revenue is expected to grow at a compound annual rate of 0.7% to reach £73.6 billion. Despite continued backing from the government, demographic changes mean that the Department for Education expects secondary pupil numbers to peak around 2027-28 and then decline, this will support revenue growth at the beginning of the period but then presents a threat as government support is likely to drop. Additionally, despite the UK government’s best efforts chronic staff shortages are plaguing the industry’s potential and support for alternative pathways threatens demand for sixth form places. But, developments in artificial intelligence present an exciting opportunity for schools to reduce staff workload.

Health Poverty Index - Root Causes: Educational resourcing: Average expenditure per pupil Source: Department of Health (DoH): Budget and Outturn Statements, 2001-2002, Pupil Level Annual School Census (PLASC) - 2001-2002, Department for Education and Skills (DfES) Publisher: Health Poverty Index Geographies: Local Authority District (LAD), National Geographic coverage: England Time coverage: 2001/02 Type of data: Administrative data Notes: The Section 52 Budget and Outturn Statements are produced by Local Education Authorities at the beginning and end of each financial year for every school maintained by the authority. They are available to the general public on the DfES website: PLASC is completed by maintained state schools (primary, middle and secondary) and maintained special schools every January and is a statutory requirement under the Education Act 1996.

Data shows number of pupils in publicly funded primary and secondary schools by Glasgow Data Zones between the year 2003 and 2012. This information is taken from the September Scottish Pupil Census for the relevant year, of publicly funded schools and hence does not include: Pupils attending grant aided Special Schools; Pupils attending private Independent Schools; Pupils educated outwith the school education system (for example at home) or Adults attending publicly funded secondary schools. The figures are based on the postcodes from where the pupils came from and were submitted for about 99% of pupils in publicly funded primary and secondary schools. More information on the methodology used is included in the metadata among the resouces. (c) Crown copyright, 2014. Data supplied by Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics Website Licence: None

Revenue in Europe’s Secondary Education industry is expected to rise slightly at a compound annual rate of 0.7% to €361 billion over the five years through 2025. Secondary education is compulsory for those aged between 11 and 16, although some leaving ages vary in different European countries. Many secondary schools are public schools funded by local and national governments, ensuring that funding remains fairly stable and revenue isn’t volatile. Private or independent schools generate more revenue due to steep tuition fees per pupil. Europe is home to some of the most expensive private schools. Over 2020-21, the COVID-19 outbreak severely hampered the day-to-day running of schools. Temporary closures forced pupils to stay at home and learn online. Schools were forced to spend more on cleaning purchases and education technology when they were allowed to re-open under strict guidelines, which squeezed profit in 2020-21. Schools have since found their footing, retaining their status as essential institutions and a government funding priority, with revenue anticipated to creep upwards by 0.2% in 2025. Revenue is expected to climb at a compound annual rate of 0.9% to €376.8 billion over the five years through 2030. Free schools, popularised in Sweden, have become a growing trend in secondary education, with the UK planning to make all of its secondary schools academies in 2030. Recently, doubt has been cast on their effectiveness, with the Swedish government set to investigate reports surrounding their poor quality and parent and teacher dissatisfaction. Technology will continue to improve teaching in secondary education, and courses will teach more digital skills that complement face-to-face teaching.

Data are collected annually through the School census exercise. This takes place in early October when each school is required to submit a return detailing information about the numbers of pupils on their register. Among the information collected are details on: year group, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, Special Educational Needs and on newcomer pupils. Statistics produced from the school census exercise qualify as National Statistics. Schools fall under various management types: Controlled schools are managed by the Education Authority through Boards of Governors. Primary and secondary school Boards of Governors consist of representatives of transferors (mainly the Protestant Churches) along with representatives of parents, teachers and the Education Authority. Nursery, grammar and special school Boards of Governors consist of representatives of the latter 3 categories. Within the controlled sector there is a small but growing number of controlled integrated schools. Voluntary (maintained) schools are managed by Boards of Governors which consist of members nominated by trustees (mainly Roman Catholic), along with representatives of parents, teachers and the Education Authority. Voluntary schools vary in the rates of capital grant to which they are entitled, depending on the management structures they have adopted. A majority are entitled to capital grants at 100%. Voluntary: (Non-Maintained) schools are mainly voluntary grammar schools, managed by Boards of Governors which consist of persons appointed as provided in each school's scheme of management along with representatives of parents and teachers and, in most cases, members appointed by the Department or the Education Authority. Voluntary Grammar Schools are funded directly by the Department. In recent years a number of grant-maintained integrated schools have been established at primary level and post-primary levels. Such schools are funded directly by the Department. The practical operation of all schools has increasingly become a matter for Boards of Governors. They are responsible for the delivery of the curriculum, admission of pupils, and in the case of schools with delegated budgets, for the management of their own financial affairs, including staffing matters. Independent schools do not receive recurrent funding from the Dept Education.

Data shows number of pupils in publicly funded primary and secondary schools receiving Gaelic Medium Education classified by the 694 data zones within Glasgow. The years showsn are between 2005 to 2012. This information is taken from the September Scottish Pupil Census, for the relevant year, of publicly funded schools and hence does not include: Pupils attending publicly funded and grant aided Special Schools; Pupils attending private Independent Schools; Pupils educated outwith the school education system (for example at home) or Adults attending publicly funded secondary schools. More information on the methodology used is contained within the metadata among the resouces. (c) Crown copyright, 2014. Data supplied by Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics Website Licence: None

Data are collected annually through the School census exercise. This takes place in early October when each school is required to submit a return detailing information about the numbers of pupils on their register. Among the information collected are details on: year group, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, Special Educational Needs and on newcomer pupils. Statistics produced from the school census exercise qualify as National Statistics. Schools fall under various management types: Controlled schools are managed by the Education Authority through Boards of Governors. Primary and secondary school Boards of Governors consist of representatives of transferors (mainly the Protestant Churches) along with representatives of parents, teachers and the Education Authority. Nursery, grammar and special school Boards of Governors consist of representatives of the latter 3 categories. Within the controlled sector there is a small but growing number of controlled integrated schools. Voluntary (maintained) schools are managed by Boards of Governors which consist of members nominated by trustees (mainly Roman Catholic), along with representatives of parents, teachers and the Education Authority. Voluntary schools vary in the rates of capital grant to which they are entitled, depending on the management structures they have adopted. A majority are entitled to capital grants at 100%. Voluntary: (Non-Maintained) schools are mainly voluntary grammar schools, managed by Boards of Governors which consist of persons appointed as provided in each school's scheme of management along with representatives of parents and teachers and, in most cases, members appointed by the Department or the Education Authority. Voluntary Grammar Schools are funded directly by the Department. In recent years a number of grant-maintained integrated schools have been established at primary level and post-primary levels. Such schools are funded directly by the Department. The practical operation of all schools has increasingly become a matter for Boards of Governors. They are responsible for the delivery of the curriculum, admission of pupils, and in the case of schools with delegated budgets, for the management of their own financial affairs, including staffing matters. Independent schools do not receive recurrent funding from the Dept Education. Enquiries relating to information collected in the school census in Northern Ireland should be addressed to: Analytical Services Unit Department of Education, Rathgael House, Balloo Road, Rathgill, Bangor, Co. Down BT19 7PR. Telephone: 028 9127 9401 email: statistics@education-ni.gov.uk

Abstract

The Teacher Development Programme (TDP) is a six-year (2013-2019) programme funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID), with a total budget of £34 million. It seeks to improve the quality of teaching in primary schools, junior secondary schools, and colleges of education at the state level in northern Nigeria. It works through in-service training for primary teachers, reform of pre-service teacher education, and strengthening evidence-based research on teaching. This evaluation focuses on the first of these three outputs: in-service training and support for primary teachers in the three core curriculum subjects of English, mathematics, and science. The programme initially operated in three states, Jigawa, Katsina, and Zamfara, and was later extended to Kaduna and Kano. This survey covers a group of schools that were randomly assigned to receive the TDP intervention in Jigawa, Katsina, and Zamfara, and a control group of schools in the same states that did not receive the TDP intervention.

The impact evaluation has three main purposes: -Formative - to help inform the implementation of TDP in Phase 1 of in-service activities and the design and implementation in its Phase 2; -Summative - to help inform TDP, DFID Nigeria, and other education stakeholders if TDP's in-service teacher training activities have led to improvements in teacher effectiveness and pupil learning levels in English, mathematics, and science and technology; and -Learning - to assess from TDP what might work for improving teacher effectiveness in Nigeria and elsewhere.

The impact evaluation is a theory-based, mixed-methods design. The endline research focuses on the efficiency, effectiveness, impact, and sustainability of the TDP (programme relevance was assessed through the baseline survey). The overarching evaluation questions for the endline research are:

-Impact: Has TDP caused changes in pupil learning in English, mathematics, and science in TDP schools? (quantitative) -Effectiveness: Has TDP led to changes in teacher effectiveness? (qualitative and quantitative)
-Efficiency: Were TDP results achieved on time and to plan? How does TDP's organisational set-up facilitate delivery? (qualitative and quantitative) -Sustainability: Are TDP's impacts on teacher effectiveness sustainable without further DFID support? (qualitative)

At the core of this impact evaluation is a constrained randomised design, with half of the sample schools assigned to receive the TDP intervention, while the other half was assigned to the control group. The main source of quantitative data is the sample panel survey of 330 schools in Jigawa, Katsina, and Zamfara conducted in 2014 and 2017. At each sample school, the head teacher and a sample of teachers and pupils were interviewed and tested on their subject knowledge in English, mathematics, and science; lesson observations were conducted; a teacher roster was compiled; and classroom attendance by teachers and pupils was measured. The baseline and endline surveys were timed to allow sufficient time for TDP impact on pupil learning outcomes to be feasible, while ensuring that a panel of pupils could be sampled at baseline and endline within the same school, and producing results in time for them to be of value to the final stages of the TDP.

The endline quantitative survey fieldwork was carried out by OPM Nigeria and Education Data, Research and Evaluation in Nigeria (EDOREN). The data from the endline survey available in the World Bank Microdata Catalog are from the TDP IE quantitative endline survey conducted in 2017. For the qualitative research findings and methods see the final endline report under Related Materials.

Geographic coverage

The endline survey was carried out in three states in northern Nigeria: Jigawa, Katsina and Zamfara. The results are not representative at individual state-level nor at the level of the three states as a whole, rather they are representative of the treatment and control clusters in the 14 local government authorities (LGAs) selected by the TDP in these three states.

Analysis unit

The primary sampling units (PSUs) of the survey are TDP-eligible public primary schools in the three states Jigawa, Katsina, and Zamfara. The secondary sampling units are teachers (selected prior to the PSUs and teaching grades 1-3 in any of the three subjects: English, mathematics, or science), pupils (in grade 3 at baseline and taught English, mathematics, or science by at least one of the sample teachers, and in grade 6 at endline) and lessons taught by the selected teachers (not sampled).

See the 'Sampling' section for more details.

Universe

The target populations are the schools eligible for the Teacher Development Programme in treatment and control groups in the three states Jigawa, Katsina and Zamfara, and the eligible teachers and pupils within these schools. See the 'Sampling' section for details on the elligibility of teachers and pupils.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The aim of the sampling design was to define a valid counterfactual (control group) from which comparisons could be made with the treatment group that participates in the Teacher Development Programme (TDP). The control group does not participate in the TDP in-service training but has background characteristics that are, on average, similar to those of the treatment group that does participate in TDP in-service training. The sampling design was based on a quasi-experimental 'constrained' randomisation approach. 'Constrained' is used because certain parameters of the impact evaluation were already fixed. For example, the Local Government Authorities (LGAs) where the TDP was to operate had already been selected by the TDP in agreement with the three states covered by the impact evaluation. In addition, pre-determined groups of schools fulfilling certain criteria (described below) constitute the sampling frame -- this is in contrast to a fully randomised design where one would expect the random drawing of groups (or clusters) of schools from a list of all state primary schools in the region under study. Randomisation was conducted only in allocating groups of schools to 'treatment' or 'control' status.

Sampling frame construction

The intended size of the sampling frame was 1,008 public primary schools eligible for the TDP (504 treatment and 504 control schools) in the three states. This would constitute the target population of eligible schools from which the sample of schools would be drawn for the survey. The sampling frame was constructed through the steps described below.

Step 1: LGAs

In each of the three states, 14 LGAs where the TDP would operate had been predetermined by the TDP in agreement with each state: -Jigawa: 14 out of 27 LGAs. -Katsina: 14 out of 34 LGAs. -Zamfara: 14 out of 14 LGAs.

Step 2: Primary schools

To be eligible for the TDP, a school must have one head teacher and at least three other teachers and at least eight grade 3 pupils. In each of the 14 LGAs in each state, two sets of 12 eligible primary schools were to be selected. Schools within each set were identified according to geographical proximity to facilitate any training and periodic meetings of teachers, and to create a peer network within the locality. The two sets of schools within each LGA were meant to be seleted to be broadly similar. State Education Boards (SUBEBs) were responsible for the selection of the schools and were provided guidelines for how to do this. For example, to take into account the location of schools (rural/urban), school size in terms of pupils enrolled and number of classrooms, condition of school infrastructure, and existence of a school-based management committee (SBMC).

Step 3: Teachers

Before the sampling of schools, the Local Government Education Authority (LGEA) and head teacher from each school in the two sets (see 2. above), were required to identify three teachers in addition to the head teacher, who would potentially receive the TDP support and training. These teachers were identified using the following criteria: -They teach classes at early grade level (grades 1 to 3); and -They teach classes in any of the three subjecs of English, mathematics, and science.

Step 4: Random assignment of treatment/control status

After receiving the lists of the sets of eligible schools and teachers from the TDP coordinators, the impact evaluation team randomly assigned one set of schools among every pair of sets in each LGA to TDP treatment, and the other set to control status. This resulted in 42 (14 LGAs x 3 states) sets consisting of 12 schools each, for a total of 504 schools to receive the TDP, and 42 (14 LGAs x 3 states) sets consisting of 12 schools each for a total of 504 schools that would not receive the TDP. The sample treatment and control schools were then selected from these two lists respectively. In the 504 schools that would receive the TDP, all head teachers and the teachers identified in step 3 (see above) would receive TDP support and training, while the head teachers and teachers in the schools on the list of 504 'non-TDP' schools would not.

Sampling stages

Stage 1: Selection of schools

At the first stage, schools were selected using implicit stratification by state, LGA, and treatment/control status. That is, each of the school sets (see step 4 above), was considered a stratum. Four schools were randomly selected from each of these sets. This