ICCS 2009 Technical Report - IEA

Table B.24.2: Allocation of teacher sample in LuxembourgSchool Participation Status—Teacher SurveyParticipating SchoolsExplicit Strata Total IneligibleNon-ParticipatingSampled Schools Schools Sampled First Second Schoolsreplacement replacementNone 31 0 24 0 0 7Total 31 0 24 0 0 7Note: Seven schools were regarded as non-participating because the within-school participation rate was below 50%.B.25. Malta• All eligible schools were sampled for ICCS 2009.• Two classrooms were sampled per school.• Very small schools (fewer than 10 students in the target grade) and special schools (schoolsfor children with acute educational needs) were excluded at the school level.• No explicit stratification was performed.• Implicit stratification was applied by sector (state, non-state) and school type (only withinthe state sector: secondary and junior lyceum), giving a total of three implicit strata.Table B.25: Allocation of student sample and teacher sample in MaltaSchool Participation Status—Student Survey and Teacher SurveyParticipating SchoolsExplicit Strata Total IneligibleNon-ParticipatingSampled Schools Schools Sampled First Second Schoolsreplacement replacementNone 55 0 55 0 0 0Total 55 0 55 0 0 0B.26. Mexico• Workers’ secondary schools, very small schools (fewer than five students in the targetgrade), communitarian secondary schools, special education schools, and privatetelesecondary schools were excluded at the school level.• Explicit stratification was performed by school type (general, particular, téchnica,telesecundaria), resulting in four explicit strata.• No implicit stratification was applied.Table B.26.1: Allocation of student sample in MexicoSchool Participation Status—Student SurveyParticipating SchoolsExplicit Strata Total IneligibleNon-ParticipatingSampled Schools Schools Sampled First Second Schoolsreplacement replacementGeneral 97 0 95 0 0 2Particular (private) 16 0 16 0 0 0Téchnica (technical) 62 0 61 0 0 1Telesecundaria 45 0 43 0 0 2(telesecondary)Total 220 0 215 0 0 5Note: One school was regarded as non-participating because the within-school participation rate was below 50%.Appendices303