1 / 34

Key Interventions/Activities for implementation of Schooling 2025

Key Interventions/Activities for implementation of Schooling 2025. Presentation to Portfolio Committee 2025 4 May 2010. Annual national assessments. Purpose & target. Monitor and track progress on laying solid foundations for learning in literacy/language and numeracy/mathematics .

shiri
Télécharger la présentation

Key Interventions/Activities for implementation of Schooling 2025

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. Key Interventions/Activities for implementation of Schooling 2025 Presentation to Portfolio Committee 2025 4 May 2010

  2. Annual national assessments

  3. Purpose & target Monitor and track progress on laying solid foundations for learning in literacy/language and numeracy/mathematics . Target population are all learners in grades 1- 6 and 9. In the SONA, 2010, the President directed:- “From this year onwards, all grade 3, 6 and 9 students will write literacy and numeracy tests that are independently moderated. We aim to increase the pass rate for these tests from the current average of between 35 (%) and 40% to at least 60% by 2014.” This year, in a sample of 1 800 (i.e. 200 per province) schools with grades 3, 6 and 9, tests will be administered and moderated independently for reporting on system-wide performance.

  4. Participation in ANA • 2008 Approximately 70% of public schools with grades 1-6 participated in ANA 2008. (This could probably be due to late communication of the programme to schools ). • 2009 Participation improved significantly to more than 95% of the schools. • All together approximately 14 000 schools participated, plus 17 schools that used Braille devices.

  5. Moderation at grades 3 & 6 • In 2009 a stratified random sample of schools with grades 3 and 6 was drawn for external quality assurance of marking and moderation of test results. • After teachers had marked the scripts and captured the scores, learner scripts from the sampled schools were collected and re-marked by “unemployed graduates” who were trained for the purpose and supervised by DoE professional staff. • A random sample of 25 (maximum) scripts were marked from each class in a sampled school. • The above process was followed with a “convenient” sample of QIDS UP schools • A total of ±1 000 schools had scripts moderated.

  6. Observations Average grade 3 performance in both literacy and numeracy went slightly over 40% (41% in literacy and 44% in numeracy). But, at grade 6 level average performance remains in the middle- and low-thirties (35% in language and 33% in mathematics). With minor deviations at grade 3, by and large the distribution of performance across provinces resembles previous studies, viz. performance in predominantly-rural provinces tends to be lower.

  7. 2010 and beyond • ANA to include grade 9 from 2010 • Writing dates: Grades 3, 6 and 9 on 2 and 4 November (Official communication on the way) • Need to strengthen communication on: • 1) inclusion of ANA in grades 1-6 as the last formal task of the year and • 2) certainty of weighting (or not) of ANA on grade 9 assessment.

  8. Creation of delivery unit

  9. Creation of a Delivery Unit • A delivery unit is being established in DBE • Derived from proposals in the Performance Monitoring & Evaluation policy document • Functions: • Monitor progress with implementation of Schooling 2025 • Compile diagnostic reports • Hold quarterly meetings with PEDs • Support in resolution of bottlenecks to effective delivery on targets

  10. Creation of a Delivery Unit (continued) • Key feature – comprised of highly skilled, entrepreneurial and agile people – small full-time team with ability to draw in relevant capacity when needed • Work closely with Delivery Unit in the Presidency • PEDs could consider to establish similar capability

  11. Accelerated infrastructure delivery plan

  12. Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative PURPOSE To develop and implement a strategy to eradicate backlogs in schools infrastructure within the 2010-2014 Strategic Plan period and beyond by applying a combination of strategies for immediate and medium term improvement in infrastructure delivery CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS CHALLENGE • An enabling policy context • Effective support to schools • School management and governance • Teacher capability and Commitment • Parental involvement • Adequacy of fixed infrastructure • Adequacy of teaching and learning inputs

  13. Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative • CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS: • Curriculum • Effective support • Management • Governance • Teacher capability • Adequate T & L. See Integrated planning Diagram 1 All Priority 1 & 2 schools in district packages to Optimum Functionality by 2014 Prov. /District Cluster plans Central DBE ASIDI Task Team Integrated DBE Sector Plan linking all sections Integrated outcomes Backlog determined by National NEIMS By Physical Planning Directorate and confirmed by PEDs Priority:1: All schools below Basic Functionality to Optimum Functionality . Priority:2 Schools above Basic functionality level to Optimum Functionality Clusters of schools in Districts graded ito relationships and distance from towns and or nodes Infra-FOCUS Education Infrastructure Sector Plan & Strategy input to DoE Sector Plan BACKLOG in terms of Basic and Optimal Functionality Education Infrastructure Sector Plan & Strategy Physical Planning Directorate + support Infrastructure Outcomes by 2014 Packages Procurement Capacity Bldg DBE ASIDI Task Team-PEDs- Districts –IDIP-DBSA-DPW-Cidb –COGTA –Nat Treasury Developers-SPAID Prog. Man. Financial Procurement Technical Educational Linkages Below Basic Functionality 5640:

  14. Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI) Target: Schools below Basic Functionality Funding: Loan Funding Partnerships: DBSA, NT, DBE Linkages with existing provincial infrastructure programmes; to be run in parallel with provincial infrastructure programmes

  15. Education MTEF Budgets 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

  16. Backlogs: Basic services & mud structures

  17. Ordinary Schools: Space Backlogs

  18. Basic Functionality Backlog

  19. Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI) NATIONAL DoE Task Team NT-DBSA-DBE DBE PRPD IDIP TA Support TAs PROVINCIAL DoE Task Team NT-DBSA-DBE-PED PED Implementing Agent/s for Province via Restricted Competitive Negotiation procedure (Table 19 SPAID) and on selection a Service Level Agreement (SLA) Prov. PSP PPPD IDIP TA Support TAs DISTRICT DISTRICT One or more districts EDUCATION DISTRICT Clusters of schools in prioritized packages PACKAGES (Clusters) Primary School <Basic Functionality Framework Agreement Disaster Affected Primary feeder school Numerous packages Secondary School Package Package Package

  20. New Norms & Standards Prototype N/S Cost Norms 2009 2010 2011 201222 2013 2014 A: GIAMA compliant plans to phase in with new Norms & Standards in a Provincial Programme U-AMPS C-AMPS DESIGN TENDER IMPLEMENTATION A: Projects with Committed funds Completed projectsregistered inNEIMS A:Current PIP PROGRAMME Basic to Optimum Functionality Programme ends Completed projects registered in NEIMS Completed projects registered in NEIMS Completed projectsregistered inNEIMS Completed projectsregistered inNEIMS B: ExistingSchools in NEIMS NEIMS Norms & STDs filter =Backlog ASIDI Prioritised existing schools to Optimum Functionality Level: Programme driven by National ASIDI Team (Detailed planning & Implementation. by PEDs and Provincial ASIDI Teams B Priority 1: All schools below Basic Functionality to Optimal Functionality 23% or 5640 Schools NEIMS (23-02-10) Priority 2: Within Priority 1 clusters priority schools above Basic Functionality to Optimum Functionality To be determined in detailed planning DIAGRAM 6: LINKING PROPOSED ASIDI WITH NEIMS AND CURRENT PIP PROGRAMME

  21. Funding Options FUNDING OPTIONS FOR THE PROPOSED ASIDI PROGRAMME • Tripartite Arrangement between Treasury, DBSA and PEDs • Where there is lack of progressTreasury to provide from affected PED’s budget, an allocation to Department of Basic Education to intervene

  22. Strategies Standardized school designs, specifications and tender documentation Use of alternative technologies and delivery systems Mobilizing major contractors Mobilizing experienced programme project management support Utilizing turn key contractors Public private partnerships

  23. NEEDU • Implementation has commenced on 1 April 2010 • Process for recruitment of CEO and other staff is underway and announcement will follow shortly • Activities: • Development of detailed programme along with institutionalisation • Evaluate key aspects of system – especially those relevant to delivery of Schooling 2025 • Play a key role in ANA 2010 • Draft an annual assessment report directed to the Minister

  24. QUALITY LEARNING AND TEACHING CAMPAIGN

  25. What is QLTC • QLTC social compact between education stakeholders and communities • Ultimately about achieving number one goal: Improving the quality of learning • About learner achievement • school functionality • QLTC is a campaign therefore should be massed based • Accountability (individual and collective) and follow up • QLTC underpinned by clear P.O.A

  26. STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES • To mobilize communities and draw awareness to the roles and responsibilities of all citizens in terms of the importance of a quality education – advocacy • To support schools in the delivery of quality learning and teaching • To ensure the establishment of QLTC structures for the implementation of the education related non-negotiables – special focus on the local structures

  27. KEY ACTIVITIES • Establishment of Structures • Formation of QLTC structures – specific emphasis should be at local level • Ensure structures linked to schools • Develop guidelines on QLTC 2. Community Mobilisation • Embark on visible campaign (national and local) • National and local conversations on QLTC • Encourage communities to adopt schools, volunteer services etc • Meet with organised formations (churches, traditional leaders, NGOs , business, etc) to support QLTC

  28. STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES - ACTIVITIES 3. Suggested activities for QLTC structures • Monitor curriculum coverage throughout the year • Communicate key strategic info (choice of subjects, registration, etc) • Engage with schools on results (grades 3,6,9,12) • Link schools with support • Support underperforming and challenged schools • Develop Rapid Response and accountability Protocols

  29. Key milestones • Regular National QLTC Steering Committee meetings (monthly) • Involvement and participation of SGBs • Provincial launches ( 7 done, 2 ready to launch) • Monitoring of opening of schools • Assessment of readiness to support underperforming schools • Multi stakeholder team working on code and translating it into a POA

  30. Way Forward • Establishment of local QLTC structures and their POA (workshop) • Translation of Codes and commitments into measurable indicators • Development of a national action plan • Continuous community mobilisation and engagement • Finalise and implement communications plan

  31. Providing effective support to schools – districts development

  32. Providing effective & targeted support to schools – District Development • Most significant lever for delivery of Schooling 2025 resides in the capability of districts to effectively monitor and support schools • However, despite some pockets of success, overall district capability falls far short of what is needed • Notable that districts that support poor and struggling schools reflect the most severe shortcomings • Therefore extremely important to seek overall policy solutions aimed at providing a general equivalence provision coupled with innovative solutions (such as drawing on NGO support)

  33. Thank You

More Related