EQUIP2 Final Report.pdf - Education Policy Data Center

16
EQUIP2 Leader Award Final Report
effectiveness of complementary education programs and 2) the high expense
when government programs fail. EQUIP2’s dissemination of the findings
prompted many development practitioners to consider the importance of
school quality and in particular, school effectiveness. As evidence of the
research’s broad and deep impact, the term “complementary education” is
now regularly used in both academic and development literature. In fact,
a recent search in the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)
identified the term in 16 different academic publications.
There were also challenges and critiques to the research. Critics argued that
because complementary education programs are dependent on volunteer
teachers and donations, they are inherently unsustainable and therefore, offer
few applicable lessons to governments. In most cases where governments
had taken ownership of complementary education programs, the schools
lost the characteristics that had made them cost-effective in the first place.
In addition, the research provoked sensitivities because of the inherent
insinuation that governments are failing to effectively provide educational
services, especially to the most vulnerable populations.
Despite these critiques, however, members of the education policy expert
team felt that, overall, the research caused development practitioners to be
more thoughtful about the role of complementary education programs in
efforts to achieve EFA. As one member commented, “The complementary
education research hasn’t resulted in a huge sea change, but there has
been a shift. If you look at the work of the World Bank and other donors,
the organizations are much more receptive to complementary education
programs now, as a result of EQUIP2’s research.”
School Effectiveness and the Opportunity to Learn
The findings from EQUIP2’s complementary education research concluded
that non-governmental schools were more effective than government
schools, largely because the schools were accountable to the local community
and created an environment that emphasized learning. In response to
these findings, EQUIP2 researchers began to examine some of the basic
components that needed to be in place to ensure students could learn.
Through a literature review, the team identified the key indicators of a basic
Opportunity to Learn (OTL): the number of days the school is open, teacher
attendance, student attendance, teacher-student ratio, instructional materials
per student, time spent on task, and reading skills. This framework was
derived from a relatively simple premise: learning is to some degree a function
of time and effort. Without adequate time spent on task, no learning is
possible.