1 / 12

Location of Uganda

Proposed Impact Evaluation for Uganda . Location of Uganda. Context. Uganda introduced UPE in 1997; enrolment increased from 2.7m in 1997 to over 7m children in primary since 2003. Introduced UPPET program in 2007; transition to S1 increased to over 69% from around 46%.

cybele
Download Presentation

Location of Uganda

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Proposed Impact Evaluation for Uganda Location of Uganda

  2. Context • Uganda introduced UPE in 1997; enrolment increased from 2.7m in 1997 to over 7m children in primary since 2003. • Introduced UPPET program in 2007; transition to S1 increased to over 69% from around 46%. • The 2 mass reforms take over 70% of the sector budget. • For sustainability of the UPPET program given the ongoing UPE, government introduced a number of policy reforms including double shift instruction and public private partnerships.

  3. Interventions 1. IE on Double Shift Instruction • Status • 273/791 schools have a student –classroom ratio of over 80 while the policy puts the standard at 60:1. • For quality instruction and manageable class sizes, DS was introduced in 119 over enrolled schools • Challenges • Negative perceptions on DS by community (due to reduced instruction time, effective engagement of children out of shift, teacher morale and motivation)

  4. Intervention 1 (Contd) Objectives of IE Motivation To enable informed decision making on the roll out of DS policy within the UPPET program. To assess the impact of double shift on education quality in terms of: inputs, teaching-learning processes, outputs and outcomes. UPPET is one of the major policy reforms underpinning the NDP. DS therefore, as one of the policy reforms to ensure sustainability of UPPET deserves tracking and evaluation for effective guidance to the Government on the way forward.

  5. Intervention 1 (contd) Target Group Broad Research Questions Schools Teachers Learners Communities Management Committees Local Governments Does double shift instruction improve learning environments, school performance and outcomes? What are the operational challenges of a DS? What are the attitudes of key players in relation to DS? Does the learning environment differ across shifts?

  6. Intervention 1 (Contd) Methodology • 1st criterion: SCR>80 • 2nd criterion: filtering based on context (boarding and remoteness- distance to schools by learners) Option 1 • Regression Discontinuity Method by: • Setting cut off SCR at 80. • Treatment group is schools with SCR>80<100 • Control group is SCR 60-80.

  7. Intervention 1 (Contd) Option 2: Randomization • Set cut off point at SCR of 80 • List all schools with SCR>80 • Randomly select treatment and control groups Challenges • Potential for contamination and attrition. • Political pressure/interference • -Denying a deserving school the quality education benefits that accrue from DS

  8. Intervention 2Public Private Partnership (PPP) • Status • 671 private schools currently partnering with Government to deliver UPPET • They include private for profit and community schools. • Government pays bursary to students attending these schools ($23 per student/term). • Criteria: Registered with government, fees <$38 per term, endorsed by DEO • Challenges • Private sector has always been a major player in the provision of education. However, the introduction of UPPET has seen the private sector access public money to deliver education. • The number of PPPs has increased from 363 in 2007 to 671 in 2010.

  9. Intervention 2 - contd Objective of IE • To provide policy advice on effectiveness of the partnership in the delivery of quality education (inputs, teaching-learning processes, outputs and outcomes). • To assess the impact of PPPs on school governance systems. Motivation • About 25% of the secondary education recurrent budget goes to the PPP providers. • There is cause to establish the impact of this partnership to learning.

  10. Intervention 2 – (contd) Target • Schools • Teachers • Communities • Local governments Broad Research Questions - What is the impact of PPPs on learning? - What is the impact of PPP on governance systems in schools.

  11. Intervention 2 (Contd) Methodology • Criteria: • Registered with Government • Full lower secondary school (S1-S4) Treatment for: • Schools with 51% pass rate with grades 1-III in the most recent examination. • Control for school with pass rate of 40%-50% with grades I-III.

  12. Next steps • Firm up methodology including indicators and timelines • Finalize concept note • Present it to M&E Working Group • Select schools • Undertake baseline

More Related