290 likes | 715 Views
Indicators for Educational Planning. ….. all you wanted to know about indicators but were afraid to ask. Why indicators?. More complex education systems Greater need for information-based decision making Transparency in use of funds Targets harder to attain: more diagnosis needed
E N D
Indicators for Educational Planning …..all you wanted to know about indicators but were afraid to ask
Why indicators? • More complex education systems • Greater need for information-based decision making • Transparency in use of funds • Targets harder to attain: more diagnosis needed • Monitoring and evaluation more a part of the accountability requirement
How is the information used? • Political rather than rational imperatives rule (EFA, FTI, Catalytic Funds etc) • Need for more accessible information • Need to assess the functioning of the education system in all facets • Assessment must be easy to interpret • Description of the system must be understandable
What do indicators attempt to do? • Show the evolution of the education system • Underscore the trends • Highlight problems
Defining an indicator • A tool which gives a sense of the state of the education system and reports on that state to the whole community • Its characteristics are: - its relevance - its ability to summarise information - its relationship to other indicators - its precision and comparability - its reliability
The capacity of an indicator • Measures how close one is to an objective • Identifies problematic situations • Meets policy concerns • Answers questions regarding policy choices • Compares the state of play to a standard or reference value
How should indicators work? • Indicators should work like a control panel or like the warning lights on a car • They indicate that there is a problem or that an objective has been fulfilled or is on the way to fulfilment • A specialist then addresses the problem • An indicator is not a target or an objective • It only illustrates progress towards a target • It is a signpost not a destination
The hierarchy of evaluation • Goal • Purpose • Objectives • Indicators (OVIs)
An example from Uganda Goal: to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of secondary education Purpose: To improve the quality of teaching and learning of English, maths and science Outputs: a) TRCs established and functioning b) In-service teacher education upgrades knowledge and skills c) Provision of materials d) Systems for sustainability in place e) Gender biases addressed in TRCs and in-service teacher education
What kind of indicators could we construct to measure these outputs? • Which are PROCESS issues? • Which are PRODUCT/OUTCOME issues?
An example from Bangladesh See the paper from PEDP II – • Are you satisfied with the categories of Outcome, System and Process Indicators – all of which come under the (ADB) heading of Key Performance Indicators ? • Do these indicators satisfy our criteria of relevance, ability to summarise information, relating well to other indicators, precision and comparability, reliability? • How does the approach compare with that of Kenya ?
Per Dalin and his ‘Development Chain’ • The need to develop indicators for The Pilot Phase The Implementation Stage The Early Institutionalisation Stage The Institutionalisation Stage The Dissemination Stage
A mixed audience of believers and non-believers The Log Frame apparently offers a technology for evaluation through its structure Its limitations are – the underlying theory of causation (the output is purely the result of the input), its human capital theoretical basis, its inflexibility in terms of unexpected change, its over-simplification of purpose A final word on the Log Frame