world bank document...2016/07/05 · srivathsan sridharan team member finance analyst wfals tatiana...
TRANSCRIPT
Document of
The World Bank
Report No.: PP1793
PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT
FOR
SMALL RECIPIENT EXECUTED TRUST FUND GRANT
IN THE AMOUNT OF U.S.$2.00 MILLION
TO THE
ORGANIZATION OF EASTERN CARIBBEAN STATES COMMISSION
FOR A
SUPPORT TO IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REGIONAL EDUCATION STRATEGY
July 6, 2016
Education Global Practice
Latin America and the Caribbean Region
This document is being made publicly available prior to approval. This does not imply a
presumed outcome. This document may be updated following management consideration
and the updated document will be made publicly available in accordance with the Bank’s
policy on Access to Information.
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
(Exchange Rate Effective July 6, 2016)
Currency Unit = East Caribbean Dollars
EC$2.71 = US$1.00
FISCAL YEAR
January 1 – December 31
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
CLASS Classroom Assessment Scoring System
CQS Selection Based on the Consultants’ Qualifications
CSEC Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate
ECD Early Childhood Development
EDMU Education Development Management Unit
FM Financial Management
GPE Global Partnership for Education
GRS Grievance Redress Services
ICB International Competitive Bidding
IFR Interim Financial Report
LCS Least-Cost Selection
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MOE Ministry of Education
NCB National Competitive Bidding
NPV Net Present Value
OECS Organization of Eastern Caribbean States
OESS OECS Education Sector Strategy
PDO Project Development Objective
QCBS Quality- and Cost-Based Selection
RPS Regional Partnership Strategy
SIP School Improvement Plan
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
USAID U.S. Agency for International Development
Vice President: Jorge Familiar
Country Director: Sophie Sirtaine
Senior Global Practice Director: Claudia Maria Costin
Practice Manager: Reema Nayar
Task Team Leader(s): Harriet Nannyonjo, Leandro Costa
Organization of Eastern Caribbean States Countries
Support to Implementation of the Regional Education Strategy
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT ................................................................................... 1
A. Country Context ............................................................................................................. 1
B. Sectoral and Institutional Context ................................................................................ 1
C. Higher-Level Objectives to which the Project Contributes ....................................... 5
II. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES .................................................................... 6
A. PDO ................................................................................................................................. 6
B. Project Beneficiaries ...................................................................................................... 6
C. PDO-Level Results Indicators ....................................................................................... 6
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................. 7
A. Project Components ....................................................................................................... 7
B. Project Financing ........................................................................................................... 9
Project Cost and Financing ...................................................................................................... 9
C. Lessons Learned and Reflected in the Project Design ................................................ 9
IV. IMPLEMENTATION ........................................................................................................... 9
A. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements ....................................................... 9
B. Results Monitoring and Evaluation ............................................................................ 10
C. Sustainability ................................................................................................................ 11
V. KEY RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES .............................................................. 11
VI. APPRAISAL SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 12
A. Economic and Financial Analysis ............................................................................... 12
B. Technical ....................................................................................................................... 12
C. Financial Management ................................................................................................ 13
D. Procurement ................................................................................................................. 13
E. Social (including Safeguard Policies) ......................................................................... 13
F. World Bank Grievance Redress ................................................................................. 14
Annex 1: Results Framework and Monitoring ........................................................................ 15
Annex 2: Detailed Project Description ...................................................................................... 36
Annex 3: Implementation Arrangements ................................................................................. 44
Annex 4: Economic Analysis ...................................................................................................... 50
i
APPRAISAL DATA SHEET
OECS Countries
Support to Implementation of the Regional Education Strategy (P158836)
PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT
LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN
GED04
Report No.: PP1793
Basic Information
Project ID EA Category Team Leader(s)
P158836 C - Not Required Harriet Nannyonjo, Leandro
Oliveira Costa
Lending Instrument Fragile and/or Capacity Constraints [ ]
Investment Project Financing Financial Intermediaries [ ]
Series of Projects [ ]
Project Implementation Start
Date Project Implementation End Date
01-Aug-2016 30-Aug-2019
Expected Effectiveness Date Expected Closing Date
29-Jul-2016 30-Sep-2019
Joint IFC
No
Practice
Manager/Manager
Senior Global
Practice Director Country Director Regional Vice President
Reema Nayar Claudia Maria
Costin Sophie Sirtaine Jorge Familiar
.
Approval Authority
Approval Authority
CD Decision
ii
.
Borrower: OECS Commission
Responsible Agency: OECS Commission, Education Management Unit
Contact: Marcellus Albertin Title: Head, Education Development
Management Unit
Telephone No.: 758 4519716 Email: [email protected]
.
Project Financing Data(in US$, million)
Total Project Cost: 2.00 Total Bank Financing: 0.00
Financing Gap: 0.00
.
Financing Source Amount
Borrower 0.00
Education for All - Fast Track Initiative 2.00
Total 2.00
.
Expected Disbursements (in US$)
Fiscal Year 0001 0002 0003 0004
Annual 94,839 500,000 1,151,532 253,629
Cumulative 94,839 594,839 1,746,371 2,000,000
.
Institutional Data
Practice Area (Lead)
Education
Contributing Practice Areas
Cross Cutting Topics
[ ] Climate Change
[ ] Fragile, Conflict & Violence
[ ] Gender
[ ] Jobs
[ ] Public Private Partnership
Sectors / Climate Change
Sector (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100)
iii
Major Sector Sector % Adaptation
Co-benefits
%
Mitigation
Co-benefits
%
Education Primary education 100
Total 100
I certify that there is no Adaptation and Mitigation Climate Change Co-benefits information
applicable to this project.
.
Themes
Theme (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100)
Major theme Theme %
Human development Education for all 100
Total 100
.
Proposed Development Objective(s)
The objectives of the project are to (a) use quality learning standards to support evidence-based
teaching and learning at the primary level; (b) improve teacher practices at the primary level; (c)
strengthen primary school leadership and accountability; and (d) initiate the strengthening of
sector monitoring and evaluation capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management
and decision making, all in the member countries.
.
Components
Component Name Cost (US$)
Component 1: Curriculum and Assessment 396,500.00
Component 2: Teacher Professional Development 1,115,000.00
Component 3: Improve School Leadership and
Accountability
209,000.00
Component 4: Project implementation, monitoring, and
evaluation
279,500.00
.
Compliance
Policy
Does the project depart from the CAS in content or in other
significant respects?
Yes [ ] No [ X ]
.
Does the project require any waivers of Bank policies? Yes [ ] No [ X ]
iv
Have these been approved by Bank management? Yes [ ] No [ X ]
Does the project meet the Regional criteria for readiness for
implementation?
Yes [ X ] No [ ]
.
Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project Yes No
Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01 X
Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 X
Forests OP/BP 4.36 X
Pest Management OP 4.09 X
Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11 X
Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 X
Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12 X
Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 X
Projects on International Waterways OP/BP 7.50 X
Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60 X
.
Legal Covenants
Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency
Institutional and Other
Arrangements X CONTINUOUS
Description of Covenant
For purposes of project implementation oversight and strategic guidance, the Recipient shall
maintain the Chief Education Officers and Planners’ Forum, with composition and
responsibilities acceptable to the Bank.
.
Conditions
Source Of Fund Name Type
Description of Condition
Team Composition
Bank Staff
Name Role Title Specialization Unit
Harriet Nannyonjo Team Leader
(ADM
Senior
Education
GED04
v
Responsible) Specialist
Leandro Oliveira
Costa
Team Leader Economist GED04
Sonia Cristina
Rodrigues Da Fonseca
Procurement
Specialist
Senior
Procurement
Specialist
GGO04
David I Financial
Management
Specialist
Sr Financial
Management
Specialist
GGO22
Gabriela Grinsteins Counsel Counsel LEGLE
Kerry Natelege
Crawford
Team Member Financial
Management
Specialist
GGO22
M. Yaa Pokua Afriyie
Oppong
Safeguards
Specialist
Senior Social
Development
Specialist
GSU04
Manju Ghumman Team Member Program
Assistant
LEGLE
Mary A. Dowling Team Member Language
Program
Assistant
GED04
Robert H.
Montgomery
Environmental
Specialist
Lead
Environment
Specialist
GEN04
Srivathsan Sridharan Team Member Finance
Analyst
WFALS
Tatiana Cristina O. de
Abreu Souza
Team Member Finance
Officer
WFALN
Viticia Amanitu
Thames
Team Member Consultant GED07
Extended Team
Name Title Office Phone Location
.
Locations
Country First Administrative
Division
Location Planned Actual Comments
vi
.
1
I. INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
A. Country Context
1. The small, open economies of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) have
been trapped for years in low growth, high debt, and limited fiscal space, exacerbated by a
number of external shocks. The impact of the 2008 global financial crisis was severe because
tourism, remittances, foreign direct investment, and official development flows decreased
sharply; growth rates plummeted; debt and fiscal imbalances increased to unsustainable levels;
and labor market conditions deteriorated. In addition, natural disasters have periodically taken a
large toll on the region, affecting lives, infrastructure, and economic activity. The OECS’s bleak
economic performance has exacerbated social problems—unemployment has been growing at
alarming rates, especially among the youth; and poverty, which was relatively high before 2008,
has very likely worsened. Data for the Caribbean indicates a similar problem among youth, with
youth unemployment standing at over 30 percent for women and 20 percent for men. The OECS
recognizes the importance of improvement of the quality of education as part of the solution to
improving social and economic development.
B. Sectoral and Institutional Context
2. The OECS education system is structured as follows: (a) three years of early education
(0–2 years); (b) two years of preschool or early childhood education (3–4 years); (c) 12 years of
compulsory education divided into one year of kindergarten (5 years), six years of primary
education (6–11 years), and five years of secondary education (12–16 years); and (d) two or
more years of postsecondary/tertiary education levels. At the end of the primary school cycle
(grade 6), students take the Common Entrance Examination, which is used for placement in
secondary schools. At the end of the secondary cycle (Form 5), students sit for a regional
examination—Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC).
3. The OECS countries have made significant progress in expanding access to basic
education in particular. The gross enrolment rate in early childhood education for students aged
3–4 years ranges from 100 in Grenada to 106 in St. Vincent, 79 in Dominica, and 105 in St.
Lucia. The gross primary enrolment rate is 113 percent in St. Vincent; 126 percent in Grenada;
109 percent in Dominica; and 103 percent in St. Lucia. Enrolment at secondary level follows a
similar pattern as the primary level. Gender parity has been achieved at the primary level,
although small differences emerge at the secondary level (118 percent for boys and 116 for girls
in Dominica; 96 percent for boys and 97 percent for girls in St. Lucia; with gender parity in
Grenada and St. Vincent and the Grenadines). The progress at the secondary level was a result of
a policy push to achieve universal secondary education as soon as possible. This progress has
also been facilitated by the significant education expenditure as percentage of gross domestic
product: 5 percent in Grenada; 7 percent in St. Vincent and the Grenadines; 5 percent in
Dominica; and 5 percent in St. Lucia in 2014.1 In 2014, government expenditure on education as
percentage of the total public expenditure was close to 20 percent for Dominica, 18 percent in St.
1 OECS Education Statistical Abstract 2013/14.
2
Lucia (increasing to 21 percent), 21 percent in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and 17 percent in
Grenada.2
4. Some challenges remain with regard to access, equity, and quality. Close to 20 percent of
children aged 3 to 5 years were not enrolled in early education in 2013. The OECS recognizes
the importance of investing in early childhood development (ECD) and is making efforts to
address this challenge. Low learning achievement is the major challenge facing the education
sector in the OECS. The 2010 grade 4 Literacy and Mathematics tests showed that about 50
percent of grade 4 students had not achieved mastery at their grade level. At the secondary level,
the percentage of students passing the CSEC was 37 percent and below for all the states. The
percentage of students who pass both English and Mathematics at CSEC is on average 23
percent across the states. Moreover, the Caribbean Examinations Council examiner’s reports
indicate poor student performance on test items that require critical thinking, analysis, or
communication.
5. There are several underlying causes of low education quality in the OECS, including the
following: First, lack of clear learning standards to facilitate formative classroom assessment and
student-centered learning. The absence of clear learning standards to guide systematic formative
and summative classroom assessment leads to failure to address learning deficiencies before
transitioning to the next grade or exiting the system. Students are automatically promoted to the
next grade even if they have not mastered the relevant competencies. Many of these children
finish school without the necessary skills and competencies to enable them to secure good jobs,
increase productivity, and lift themselves out of poverty. The best-performing countries have
established learning standards and have developed assessment systems to monitor their
achievement (Barber and Mourshed 2007;3 Mourshed, Chijioke, and Barber 2010
4). Placing
students’ outcomes as the main goal of educational policies requires that the learning outcomes
to be achieved at every grade level are clearly specified and that the level of expected
performance is clear. Second, limited continuous professional development opportunities to
improve teaching, or to accompany changes to the curriculum, respond to policy changes and
address identified areas of need. Professional development is even more critical in cases where
teacher qualifications are low. In 2014, the proportion of untrained teachers at the primary school
level ranged from 11 percent to 38 percent across the member states. As research over the past
decade suggests, teacher quality is highly correlated with student learning outcomes (Rockoff
2004).5
6. Third is the low capacity of school leaders to support teaching and thereby improve
student achievement. In the OECS, good teachers are promoted to become head teachers without
any training, and there are limited opportunities for professional development for school leaders.
Moreover, communication between schools and parents or other stakeholders is weak and
instructional leadership and accountability need to be strengthened. Research has shown that
2 From OECS Education Statistical Abstract 2013/14 and OECS costing data.
3 Barber, M., and M. Mourshed. 2007. How the World's Best Performing School Systems Come Out on Top.
McKinsey and Company. 4 Mourshed, M, C. Chijioke, and M. Barber. 2010. How the World’s Most Improved School Systems Keep Getting
Better. McKinsey and Company. 5 Rockoff, Jonah E. 2004. “The Impact of Individual Teachers on Student Achievement: Evidence from Panel
Data.” American Economic Review 94 (2): 247–252.
3
there is no single case of a school improving its student achievement record in the absence of
talented leadership (Louis et al. 2010).6 Leadership is only second to classroom instruction
among school-related factors that influence student outcomes (Leithwood 2005).7
7. The OECS is taking steps to address the challenge of low learning achievement.
Improving the quality of learning for every child is at the heart of the Regional Education
Strategy for the OECS. The OECS has developed a Regional Education Strategy, ‘Every Learner
Succeeds’, to address the common challenge of low learning achievement across member states.
The strategy was endorsed, by the OECS Council of Ministers of Education at their annual
meeting of May 2012, for implementation across the states. This strategy also constitutes the
education chapter in the OECS Growth and Development Strategy. The OECS country-level
education plans have been or are being aligned to this overarching Regional Education Sector
Strategy. The results-based strategy is summarized in box 1.
8. Countries have started implementation of various aspects for the OECS Education Sector
Strategy (OESS): Under the strategic imperative for improvement of quality and accountability
of school leadership, the OECS is implementing various school leader development programs
although these are not grounded in the recently agreed OECS professional standards for school
leaders. Implementation of these standards would be a logical way forward. Regarding the
strategic imperative for improvement of curriculum and assessment strategies, countries are at
various stages—Dominica completed revision of its primary curriculum, Saint Lucia is in the
process of piloting curriculum for various subjects, and there is limited progress in this area for
Vincent and the Grenadines and Grenada. The OECS has agreed to build on the Dominica
experience as a basis for clarifying learning standards at the regional level and an accompanying
assessment system in line with the OECS Economic Union. Under the strategic imperative to
improve teachers’ professional development, teacher professional standards have been developed
but these are yet to be implemented.
9. Countries are implementing various activities focusing on improving teacher quality
including teacher training activities mainly focused on pre-service training, information and
communication technology, and orientation for new teachers. Although regional teacher
standards are yet to be adopted by the countries, they have been used as a basis for revising and
improving the existing teacher appraisal system. Countries have endorsed the teacher appraisal
system and are putting systems in place for their implementation. The timing and configuration
or implementation arrangements will vary across countries. Some are seeking to link the
appraisal with a broader strategy to professionalize the teaching service while others are using it
as a tool to establish teaching councils, which can monitor teacher quality and competency.
There will be need for specific professional development aimed at building teacher capacity to
implement the new initiatives focusing on improving teaching and learning for all, including the
use of learning standards, monitoring student learning based on these standards, and improving
classroom practices.
6 Louis, K. S., K. Leithwood, K. L. Wahlstrom, and S. E. Anderson. 2010. Investigating the Links to Improved
Student Learning: Final Report of Research Findings. New York: The Wallace Foundation. 7 Leithwood, K. 2005. “Understanding Successful Principalship: Progress on a Broken Front.” Journal of
Educational Administration 43 (6): 619.
4
10. The development of the regional strategy was informed by a study of students at risk in
the OECS. The findings and the recommendation informed the strategic priorities and key
strategies including the decision to deal with gender issues as a cross-cutting theme. The study
broadly examined many factors, including those related to the socioeconomic situation,
instructional practices in schools that affect access, participation, and learning. The emphasis on
improving teacher competencies and changing classroom practice to make them more learner
centered are strategies that are expected to reduce the at-school risks. The following ongoing
studies will shed further light on equity issues and what actions need to be taken to improve
equity: (i) status of student support services; (ii) out of school students; (iii) inequality of
education opportunity. With support from Caribbean Development Bank, additional work has
been undertaken to mainstream gender in planning and implementing education programs in the
OECS. The output of this activity was a set of guidelines for school leaders and teachers in
ensuring that gender sensitive issues were addressed, particularly in curriculum delivery.
5
Box 1. OESS – Program Vision, Goal, Objective, and Components
Vision
All citizens, at every stage of their learning journey, from early years to adulthood, are able to reach their full
potential and be successful in life, at work, and in society.
Goal
To contribute to the socioeconomic advancement of the OECS through a quality education system that enables
learners of all ages to reach their true potential
Objective
To improve learning outcomes, with equity
Subobjectives
1. To achieve increased and more equitable access to quality ECD services
2. To improve the quality of teaching and learning and achieve greater equity in learning opportunities, with a
priority focus on primary and secondary education, including
(a) improved teacher quality and qualifications;
(b) improved curriculum, strategies for student assessment, and instructional approaches, all effectively used
for learning-centered approaches, addressing the needs of all students, including the vulnerable (boys,
poor, remote, and so on); and
(c) improved school leadership and management capacity, especially to support improvements in the quality
of teaching and learning, evidence-based school management, and accountability.
3. To improve the quality, relevance, and affordability of tertiary and continuing education
4. To expand all students’ access to technical and vocational education and training at all levels of the education
system to respond to the demands of the jobs market
5. To strengthen sectorwide leadership, management, and accountability systems and capacities to instill a
culture of evidence-based strategic management and decision making
Strategic Imperatives (or Components/Areas of Intervention)
1. Improve the quality and accountability of leadership and management
2. Improve teachers’ professional development
3. Improve the quality of teaching and learning
4. Improve curriculum and strategies for assessment
5. Increase (and expand) access to quality ECD services
6. Provide opportunities for all learners in technical and vocational education and training
7. Increase provisions for tertiary and continuing education
Source: The OESS.
C. Higher-Level Objectives to which the Project Contributes
11. The higher-level objective is to improve learning outcomes at the basic education level.
The proposed project contributes to the World Bank’s twin goals of eliminating poverty and
boosting shared prosperity by improving the quality of basic education. These objectives will be
achieved through a mix of interventions aimed at improving teaching and learning. Improvement
in quality of education and outcomes in the OECS will, in the long term, enhance employability
of the citizens and support growth.8 Better education will also contribute to greater shared
8 Evidence shows that a difference of one standard deviation in test scores between countries equates to roughly two
percentage points in annual long-term gross domestic product growth. See: Hanushek, Eric A., and Ludger
Woessmann. 2010. Education Quality and Economic Growth.
6
prosperity because children from poorer households perform worse than their wealthier peers in
school.
12. The proposed project is consistent with the Bank Group OECS Regional Partnership
Strategy (RPS) FY2015–19 Framework discussed by the Board of Executive Directors on
November 20, 2014. The RPS recognizes the importance of improvement in the quality of
education as a way of contributing to long-term unemployment and poverty reduction. The
education aspects of the project are aligned with the RPS pillar of resilience, and in particular
outcome 7 focusing on establishment of quality learning standards. The proposed project focuses
on improving the quality of basic education that aligns with the Education Global Practice goals
of access for all and learning for all. In addition, the proposed project is aligned with the Global
Partnership for Education (GPE) Goal 2 of improved and more equitable student learning
outcomes through quality teaching and learning. Moreover, the project’s focus on strengthening
sector monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capacity as well as school leadership directly relates to
GPE Goal 3 of efficient and effective education systems. Furthermore, the proposed focus on
teacher professional development and primary grade assessment relates directly to the GPE
strategic objective 3 - implementing sector plans focused on improved equity, efficiency, and
learning.
II. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES
A. PDO
13. The project development objectives (PDOs) are to (a) use quality learning standards to
support evidence-based teaching and learning at the primary level; (b) improve teacher practices
at the primary level; (c) strengthen primary school leadership and accountability; and (d) initiate
the strengthening of sector M&E capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management
and decision making, all in the member countries.
B. Project Beneficiaries
14. The project beneficiaries are children attending primary schools in Grenada (10,069), St.
Lucia (16,268), St. Vincent and the Grenadines (12,014), and Dominica (4,866). The current
teachers and school leaders will also benefit from professional development activities (285
principals and 3,335 teachers).
C. PDO-Level Results Indicators
(a) Percentage of primary teachers using formative assessment based on learning
standards
(b) Percentage of teachers rated effective on classroom practices9
9 Effective teaching practices will be determined through classroom observation that uses guidance provided by
Kane, Kerr, and Pianta (2014). Designing Teacher Evaluation Systems: New Guidance from the Measures of
Effective Teaching Project. John Wiley & Sons. Baseline based on guidance from country statisticians on
representative sampling will be established in March 2016 using Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS)
scores. Baseline CLASS scores will be established in August 2016.
7
(c) Percentage of primary schools with a School Improvement Plan (SIP) focused on
learning outcomes
(d) Percentage of school leaders reporting on progress of teachers practices and students
learning to oversight bodies
(e) Production of an annual report on plan implementation and performance indicators
at the country level
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Project Components
15. Component 1: Curriculum and Assessment (US$396,500). The best-performing
countries have established learning standards and have developed assessment systems to monitor
their achievement (Barber and Mourshed 2007).10
Placing students’ outcomes as the main goal
of educational policies requires that the learning outcomes to be achieved at every grade level be
clearly specified and that the level of expected performance be clear; grade-level learning
standards need to be clarified and brought in line with international learning standards. The
commitment of the OESS to ensure that every child learns will underpin the definition of the
learning standards. Formative assessment will be the major focus of the reform. The project will
support the following activities:
(a) Reviewing the harmonized curriculum to clarify grade-level learning standards for
primary education in literacy, numeracy, science, and social studies through (i)
provision of consultant services and (ii) the carrying out of consultations at the
regional and member country levels
(b) Developing a learner-centered assessment framework to monitor the achievement of
learning standards (formative assessment), through (i) provision of consultant
services and (ii) the carrying out of consultations at the regional and member
country levels
(c) Developing and implementing guidelines for using the learning standards and
formative classroom assessment through (i) the provision of consultant; (ii) the
carrying out of consultations at the regional and member country levels; and (iii) the
adaptation of the learning standards and formative assessment to member country
level context
16. Component 2: Teacher Professional Development (US$1,115,000). Teachers’ content
knowledge and classroom practices are the strongest in-school predictor of student achievement
(Barber and Mourshed 2007). Teachers’ instructional effectiveness improves when they receive
opportunities for continuous professional learning that focuses on the quality of teacher-student
interaction around subject matter and collegial professional interactions, mentoring, and ongoing
coaching and respectful monitoring systems that provide frequent feedback on the quality and
10
Barber, M. and M. Mourshed. 2007. How the World's Best Performing School Systems Come Out on Top.
McKinsey and Company.
8
effectiveness of teachers’ instruction. In addition, professional development that is embedded in
teachers’ everyday teaching routines is critical when new instructional policy initiatives are
being introduced (Cohen and Hill 2001).11
17. This component will support the following activities: (a) reviewing the teacher training
programs in member countries; (b) reviewing classroom practices in member countries to
understand current practices and identify capacity gaps to inform teacher professional
development; (c) developing a teacher professional development course and school-based
professional learning communities to improve classroom practices; (d) carrying out
competence-based professional development activities for teachers12
in the member countries
through training on effective classroom practices, formative assessment, all in line with learning
standards and the use of student learning data; and (e) establishing an online community of
practice for teachers to access online instructional resources and share lesson plans and
experiences.
18. Component 3: Improve School Leadership and Accountability (US$209,000). Research has shown that there is no single case of a school improving its student achievement
record without talented leadership (Louis et al. 2010).13
Leadership is only second to classroom
instruction among school-related factors that influence student outcomes (Leithwood 2005).14
19. This component will support the following activities: (a) developing a school leader
training program based on professional standards, including instructional leadership to support
teachers to improve instructional practices; (b) carrying out competence-based training and
certification activities for school leaders based on leadership standards, including on instructional
leadership and use of data in planning, management, and reporting; and (c) developing a
handbook for school principals/leaders to guide school leadership and management.
20. Component 4: Project implementation, monitoring, and evaluation (US$279,500).
This component will support project implementation and M&E through (a) the procurement and
financial management (FM) requirements of the project; (b) process monitoring of the teacher
and school leader professional development activities; (c) the establishment of the national
routines for ongoing and regular monitoring of learning standards and assessment using available
data and additional research; (d) the monitoring of teacher classroom practices through the use of
CLASS; and (e) the carrying out of annual regional and country-level program reviews.
11
Cohen, D., and H. Hill 2000. “Instructional Policy and Classroom Performance: The Mathematics Reform in
California.” The Teachers College Record 102 (2): 294–343. 12
Priority will be given to Pre-K teachers. The number of teachers in the four countries is as follows: Dominica
(511); Grenada (903); St. Lucia (1,071); St. Vincent and the Grenadines (819). The number of teachers to be trained
will depend on unit costs (to be obtained from the ongoing costing exercise) and available resources (St. Vincent and
the Grenadines and St. Lucia might allocate IDA resources toward implementation of education-related activities. 13
Louis, K. S., K. Leithwood, K. L. Wahlstrom, and S. E. Anderson. 2010. Investigating the Links to Improved
Student Learning: Final Report of Research Findings. New York: The Wallace Foundation. 14
Leithwood, K. 2005. “Understanding Successful Principalship: Progress on a Broken Front.” Journal of
Educational Administration 43 (6): 619.
9
B. Project Financing
21. This will be a grant, implemented through a Recipient Executed Trust Fund arrangement
between the GPE and the Bank. There is also a possibility of St. Vincent and the Grenadines and
St. Lucia allocating some IDA resources to education activities under the OECS Human
Development Resilience Project, and those resources will build on and scale up the proposed
activities under this grant. Preliminary discussions have led to an education component structure
consisting of four subcomponents.
22. At the regional level, the OECS Commission will implement the following activities in
collaboration with the countries and with support from grant funding: (a) development of
learning standards framework based on a review of the curriculum and assessment; (b)
assessment to identify capacity gaps for teachers and school leaders; (c) preparation of
professional development modules to support training of teachers and school leaders on effective
classroom practices and implementation of learning standards; and (d) M&E of implementation
of national activities to improve pedagogy and the promotion of knowledge sharing across
countries.
Project Cost and Financing
23. Table 1 provides the cost estimates and financing for the components described above.
Project Components Project Cost
(US$)
Grant
Financing
(US$)
% Financing
1. Curriculum and Assessment 396,500 396,500 100
2. Teacher Professional Development 1,115,000 1,115,000 100
3. Improve School Leadership and Accountability 209,000 209,000 100
4. Project implementation and M&E 279,500 279,500 100
Total Financing Required 2,000,000 2,000,000 100
C. Lessons Learned and Reflected in the Project Design
24. The importance of professional development for both teachers and school leaders when
new initiatives are introduced is well established. The planned professional development aspects
will be based on best practice, including imbedding training in practice and promoting
collaboration, including through communities of practice.
IV. IMPLEMENTATION
A. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements
25. The OECS Commission will be the implementing agency for the project. Implementation
at the regional level will be coordinated by the Education Development Management Unit
(EDMU) of the OECS Commission. The head of the EDMU will be the project coordinator
responsible for the day-to-day management of the project. The EDMU will also be the main
10
focal point for monitoring the implementation of the regional activities, including the collection
and reporting of the results. It will organize regular for a, including joint reviews, for reviewing
progress and sharing lessons learned from the overall program, share best practices, and promote
knowledge exchange between countries. The fiduciary responsibilities will be managed by the
respective units at the OECS Commission. The OECS Commission managed the Institutional
Development Grant, which supported development of the Regional Education Strategy and has
implemented other Bank-financed projects. The EDMU has in the past successfully coordinated
a Bank grant, which supported capacity building for education statistics across six member
states. This grant achieved satisfactory results and the activities supported through that grant
continue to be sustained, including annual publication of education statistical digest. In addition,
the OECS Commission has implemented regional education projects financed by other partners.
For example, the OECS Eastern Caribbean Reform Project and a Technical and Vocational
Education project financed by the Canadian and German governments, respectively. The
UNICEF Eastern Caribbean Areas Office through an ongoing Program Cooperation Agreement
with the OECS has been providing financial support for regional education activities.
26. The Chief Education Officers’ Forum established at the time of preparation of the OESS
will act as the Project Steering Committee with chief education officers assuming chairmanship
of the committee on a rotating basis as is the current practice. The committee will offer advice
and guidance on the project activities as part of the overall implementation of the OESS.
27. Institutional and implementation arrangements at the national level. As part of the
regional arrangements for implementing the OESS, the program implementation at the national
level will be mainstreamed into the Ministry of Education (MOE). This model is in response to
previous experience where projects were perceived as competing priorities outside the scope of
the work program of the MOE. The national-level counterpart will be the chief education officer
who may designate a national focal point. The actual implementation will be managed by the
units responsible for the various program components. For example, the curriculum and
assessment components will be implemented by the Curriculum Unit with the head of the
Curriculum Unit having direct responsibility for related activities. Similarly, education officers
with responsibility for teacher training and school leadership—usually a senior education
officer—will be responsible for activities related to their respective portfolios. Implementation
calls for a high level of coordination between various units and education officers. This
coordination will be managed by the chief education officer or a delegated focal point. The focal
point will coordinate closely with all relevant stakeholders and beneficiaries, and organize
national consultation meetings of various aspects of the project.
B. Results Monitoring and Evaluation
28. The project will rely on the revised results and monitoring framework developed for the
implementation of the Regional Education Strategy 2012–2021. The results framework for the
project detailed in annex 1 includes project-specific indicators. Quarterly and annual progress
reports will be submitted to the Bank by the EDMU and will be informed by reports submitted
from the countries.
29. The project-level results mapping and M&E framework are derived from the broader
results mapping and M&E frameworks prepared for the OECS 10-year Regional Education
11
Strategy (2012–2021). As such, they lay out a hierarchy of impacts, outcomes, intermediate
outcomes, and outputs (and related indicators), which will facilitate the tracking of progress
along the project results chain. This supports the intention of the OECS, as expressed in its
10-year education strategy, to monitor and evaluate implementation progress, as well as
outcomes, and their plausible links. Annex 1 thus presents (a) a mapping of the project’s results;
(b) a matrix of project outcome indicators organized by project objectives; and (c) a matrix of
project output indicators organized by project components. The M&E of project implementation
and outcomes will rely on existing capacity and systems at the country level and at the regional
level, which will be strengthened through (a) a learning-by-doing approach and (b) technical
assistance, as needed. The EDMU will coordinate M&E activities at the regional level, including
organizing progress reviews, and coordinating with the countries to ensure that the statisticians
and planners collect the country level project data as part of monitoring sector performance. This
will not present any unnecessary additional burden on those carrying out this work, because they
will be collecting, analyzing, and using this information for management and decision making as
a part of the overall M&E plan for the 10-year strategy.
C. Sustainability
30. The sustainability of the project results is assured because it supports the existing OECS
Regional Education Strategy 2012–2021, which was endorsed and is supported by all of the
OECS member states. Improving quality of learning is a key priority for the heads of government
(who are at the same time the ministers of finance) in the OECS. In addition, most of the GPE
resources will go toward activities to strengthen system capacity and not recurrent costs.
Moreover, the project will be implemented within the government system, thus increasing the
chances of continuity even after the end of the project. All these increase the likelihood of
continued implementation of the frameworks and actions supported by the project.
V. KEY RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
31. The overall risk for the project is Moderate. The political and sector strategy risks are
Low. The quality of education agenda enjoys broad-based political support in the four states; it is
the major focus of the OECS Regional Education Strategy and, therefore, faces a low risk of
political opposition to the proposed project. The implementing agency risk is substantial both at
the country and regional levels. The additional layer created by the regional aspects of the project
may create implementation delays. This problem will be mitigated by having the Chief
Education Officers’ Forum to oversee the implementation of project activities. In addition, this
will require more effort and an experienced team from the Bank to be able to deliver on results
on the proposed innovative interventions. There is a moderate risk that countries may not
implement at the same pace. Addressing this risk will require putting in place a mechanism to
support the countries to move at the same pace to achieve the economies of scale that the
regional approach seeks to achieve. There is a moderate risk of underestimation of required
supervision resources. The costs for managing this operation will be higher than a single country
operation. This is a new model for delivering support to small island states using a single
operation to support several countries. This has to be taken into consideration when allocating
GPE resources for supervision. There is a substantial stakeholder risk mainly related to teacher
and school principals’ resistance to taking on the new initiatives. This will be mitigated by
ensuring strong stakeholder participation in the preparation process. Consultations will take place
12
both at regional and country levels. Every effort will be made to present the project-supported
initiatives as building on what already exists rather than as new initiatives.
VI. APPRAISAL SUMMARY
A. Economic and Financial Analysis
32. The rationale for public sector provision and GPE support to primary education is a
justifiable option. Education and human capital development are directly linked to economic
growth, productivity, and the improvement of living standards.15
The low quality of education
has been highlighted, by the Caribbean Growth Forum, as the major constraint to growth,
employment, and poverty reduction. It is expected that as learning achievement improves, more
people will enter the labor market and the economic benefits of the workforce affected by the
project are expected to improve and more people will move out of poverty. The activities
implemented under the project will have a direct development impact on the capacity of
education systems in the OECS to provide better quality instruction, which in the long term will
improve educational outcomes and labor market outcomes at the individual level. This impact
will be seen through a higher probability of school completion, which improves the lifetime
earnings and type of employment, and higher labor productivity growth, using labor earnings as
a proxy for labor productivity. Moreover, as schools are able to offer better instruction, including
to the poor students, the gap in learning outcomes between the rich and the poor will reduce.
33. The Bank has global experience in supporting government efforts to improve teacher
pedagogical practices and professional development, capacity for school leadership, and
monitoring student learning. It provides added value in this project through its technical expertise
and financing. The Bank has and will contribute to support development of government’s
capacity, under each component that supports the achievement all three PDOs. A quantitative
economic analysis shows a net benefit and positive return for the GPE Project. It was considered
that the project effects lead to higher returns to skills that affect the wages of beneficiaries
(Hanushek et al. 2015).16
With a 10 percent discount rate, the project has a net present value
(NPV) of US$11.1 million with an internal rate of return of 27.0 percent. In addition, a
sensitivity analysis to consider an alternative worsening scenario, in which the effects of
activities on students’ performance are assumed to be only half as large. Even in this alternative
case, the project appears to be a good investment from an economic point of view, with an NPV
of US$5.5 million and an internal rate of return of 20.2 percent.
B. Technical
34. The OECS policy priorities supported under the project are supported by global evidence
as most crucial to improving educational outcomes. First, the quality of an education system is
bound by the quality of its teachers. There is emerging evidence that the right policies for
professional development of and supporting teachers can transform the effect that teachers have
in the classroom. Second, no education system has systematically and sustainably improved its
15
Barro, R. 2001. “Human Capital and Economic Growth.” The American Economic Review 91 (2): 12–17. 16
Hanushek, Eric A., Guido Schwerdt, Simon Wiederhold, and Ludger Woessmann. 2015. “Returns to Skills
around the World: Evidence from PIAAC.” European Economic Review 73: 103–130.
13
performance without good leadership. The OECS’s move toward setting professional standards
and providing competence-based professional development for school leaders will fulfill that
critical element of education system management. Third, there is increasing evidence that the use
of formative learning assessment can have a significant impact on learning if properly
implemented. The selected areas of intervention are also reflected in the Bank’s Education Sector
Strategy 2020: ‘invest early, invest smartly, and invest for all’. All these activities will, in the
medium to longer term, improve the learning conditions of students and improve educational
outcomes.
C. Financial Management
35. FM will be handled by the OECS Commission fiduciary team, which is also handling
other ongoing Bank-financed activities and has implemented several Bank-financed trust funds,
including an Institutional Development Fund supporting education. Disbursement of project
funds will be based on Interim Financial Reports (IFRs). The IFRs will be prepared and sent to
the Bank every six months (July–December and January–June) and 45 days after the end of
every reporting period. Accounting records will be kept in the accounting system ‘Sage 50’ and
will be updated and monitored in accordance with the financial regulations manual of the OECS
Commission. The current Operations Manual is very comprehensive and the processes and
procedures once applied consistently are adequate to ensure that the financial information is
accurate and funds are only used for project purposes.
36. A segregated U.S. dollar designated account and local currency project account will be
opened upon effectiveness of the project at First National Bank in St. Lucia, and the bank
account and bank information will be conveyed to the Bank. The operation of the bank accounts
will fall under the current operations processes of the OECS Commission.
D. Procurement
37. Procurement will be handled by the OECS Commission Procurement Unit, which is also
handling the ongoing Bank-financed activities being implemented through the commission. The
team has extensive experience working with Bank-financed projects.
38. Procurable items financed under the project will be limited to small goods and
consultants and will be procured in accordance with the Bank’s ‘Guidelines: Procurement of
Goods, Works, and Non-Consulting Services under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits and Grants by
World Bank Borrowers’, dated January 2011 and revised July 2014; ‘Guidelines: Selection and
Employment of Consultants under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits and Grants by World Bank
Borrowers’ dated January 2011 and revised July 2014; the IDA Anticorruption Guidelines dated
July 1, 2005, and as amended October 15, 2006; and the provisions stipulated in the Grant
Agreement.
E. Social (including Safeguard Policies)
39. The project is classified as Category C because it does not finance any construction or
other activities that can cause potential negative impacts to the environment or natural habitats.
The main thrust of the OESS is equity in learning outcomes: ‘Learning for All’. The planned
activities—formative assessment, improving school leadership, teacher professional
14
development, and M&E—are all focusing on areas proven to be impactful on equity aspects. The
following studies will shed further light on equity issues and what actions need to be taken to
improve equity: (a) status of student support services; (b) out of school students; (c) inequality of
education opportunity
40. Gender. The project will support the OECS in making teaching sensitive to the
differences in learning styles of boys and girls and the impact this may have, for example, on
motivation. The project also includes support in improving teacher sensitivity within
teacher-student interactions as they relate to the learning needs of boys and girls. In addition, the
assessment framework as well as the M&E framework for the project will provide information
by gender, to better inform policy interventions. The Bank will also work with the OECS to
incorporate gender aspects in the training materials to make them gender sensitive. Where
applicable, indicators in the project’s M&E framework will be reported by gender.
41. Beneficiary feedback mechanisms. The project will include mechanisms to incorporate
beneficiary feedback at several levels. The project will support the surveys, which will be used to
incorporate feedback from teachers, parents, school leaders, and community members. This will
be reflected in the results framework. The project will also promote feedback from students
through the application of the new diagnostic census-based student assessment, which will
include surveys on student perceptions.
F. World Bank Grievance Redress
42. Communities and individuals who believe that they are adversely affected by a
Bank-supported project may submit complaints to existing project-level grievance redress
mechanisms or the Bank’s Grievance Redress Service (GRS). The GRS ensures that complaints
received are promptly reviewed to address project-related concerns. Project-affected
communities and individuals may submit their complaint to the Bank’s independent Inspection
Panel, which determines whether harm occurred, or could occur, because of Bank
noncompliance with its policies and procedures. Complaints may be submitted at any time after
concerns have been brought directly to the Bank’s attention and Bank management has been
given an opportunity to respond. For information on how to submit complaints to the Bank’s
corporate GRS, please visit http://www.worldbank.org/GRS. For information on how to submit
complaints to the Bank Inspection Panel, please visit www.inspectionpanel.org.
15
Annex 1: Results Framework and Monitoring
OECS COUNTRIES: Support to Implementation of the Regional Education Strategy (P158836)
Results Framework - Regional Level
Project Development Objective
Expected Impact: Improved learning outcomes (expected to happen beyond project completion but included to keep the focus on learning). Equity
considerations: gender, location, disability.
Project Development Objectives: The objectives of the proposed project are to (a) use learning standards to support evidence-based teaching and learning; (b)
improve teacher practices at the primary level; (c) strengthen primary school leadership and accountability; and (d) initiate the strengthening of sector M&E
capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management and decision making, all in the member countries.
Indicator Name Core Unit of
Measure
Cumulative Target Values
Frequency Data
Source/Methodology
Resp. for Data
Collection Description Baseline
2016 2017 2018 2019
Impact Indicators17
Primary School Literacy Skills
% of pupils literacy at or above their grade level at the key stages of grade 2 by gender, urban-rural residence
Primary School Mathematics Skills
% of pupils by gender and urban-rural residence performing at or above the minimum standards at grade 2 in Mathematics
Project Development Objective Indicators
PDO Indicator 1: Use learning standards to support evidence-based teaching and learning at the primary level.
17
These are included to keep the focus on learning but are expected to be achieved after Project closing. Project Development Objective indicators will be used to monitor Project achievements. This applies to all countries (Annex 1b-e) as well as the regional level.
16
Percentage of primary
teachers using
formative assessment
based on learning
standards
% 0 25 50 Annual MOE
Department of
Primary
Education
Number of teachers
using formative
assessment/Total
number of primary
school teachers
PDO Indicator 2: Improve teacher practices at the primary level.
Percentage of teachers
rated effective on
classroom practices18
% TBD TBD TBD Annual Project Implementation
Reports
MOE
Department of
Primary
Education
Number of teachers
assessed as
effective/Total
number of teachers
observed using
CLASS
PDO Indicator 3: Improve primary school leadership and accountability.
Percentage of primary
schools with an SIP
focused on learning
outcomes
% 0 25 50 Annual Project Implementation
Reports
MOE
Department of
Primary
Education
Number of primary
schools with SIPs
focused on
learning/Total number
of primary schools
Percentage of school
leaders reporting on
progress of teachers
practices and students
learning to oversight
bodies
% 0 25 50 Annual Project Implementation
Reports
MOE
Department of
Primary
Education
Number of primary
school leaders
reporting progress on
teacher practices and
student learning/Total
number of primary
school leaders
PDO Indicator 4: Initiate the strengthening of sector M&E capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management and decision making.
Production of an
annual report on plan
implementation and
performance indicators
Yes/No No Yes Yes MOE Statistics
and Planning
Units
Country annual report
on plan
implementation and
performance
indicators
18
Capacity building for respective staff of the MOE is ongoing. Baseline data will be available by August 2016.
17
at the country level
.
Intermediate Results Indicators
Component 1 - Curriculum and Assessment
Learner-centered
assessment framework
and guidelines for
using learning
standards approved
Yes/No No Yes Once Project Implementation
Reports
MOE
Curriculum and
Assessment Unit
Component 2 - Teacher Professional Development
Teacher professional
development course
developed
Yes/No No Yes EDMU
Number of teachers
trained and certified as
competent
Cumulative
number
0 270 540 Annual Project Implementation
Reports
MOE
Department of
Primary
Education
Component 3 - Improve School Leadership and Accountability
Handbook for school
leaders developed and
printed
Yes/No No Yes EDMU Handbook
School leadership
training program
developed
Yes/No No Yes EDMU Course
Number of school
leaders certified in
competence-based
standards
Cumulative
number
0 135 270 Annual Project Implementation
Reports
MOE
Department of
Primary
Education
Component 4 - Project implementation, monitoring, and evaluation
Number of teachers
monitored through
CLASS
Cumulative
number
200 300 400 Annual Project Implementation
Reports
MOE
Department of
Primary
18
Education
Number of schools
analyzing and using
student learning data
Cumulative
number
140 200 300 MOE
Department of
Primary
Education
M&E Manual
developed
Yes/No No EDMU Manual
Stakeholder feedback
surveys undertaken
No No Yes Yes Annual Project Implementation
Reports
EDMU
Survey
19
20
ANNEX 1 B. RESULTS FRAMEWORK DOMINICA
Expected Impact: Improved learning outcomes (expected to happen beyond project completion, except perhaps for Grade 2 performance). Equity considerations:
gender, income, location, disability, ethnic groups
Project Development Objectives: The objectives of the proposed project are to (a) use learning standards to support evidence-based teaching and
learning; (b) improve teacher practices at the primary level; (c) strengthen primary school leadership and accountability; and (d) initiate the
strengthening of sector monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management and decision making.
Indicator Name Core Unit of
Measure
Baseline
(GPE
2016)
Cumulative Target Values Frequency
Data Source
/Methodology
Resp. for
Data
Collection
Description
2017 2018 2019 2020
Impact Indicators
Primary School literacy Skills
% of pupils literacy skills at or above their grade level at the key stages of grade 2 by gender, urban-rural residence
Primary School Mathematics Skills
% of pupils by gender and urban-rural residence performing at or above the minimum standards at grade 2 in Mathematics
Project Development Objective Indicators
PDO Indicator 1: Use learning standards to support evidence-based teaching and learning at the primary level
Percentage of
primary teachers
using formative
assessment based
on learning
standards
%
0
0
25
50
Annual
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Dpt
#of teachers using
formative
assessment/Total # of
primary school
teachers
Objective Indicator 2: Improve teacher practices at the primary level
21
Percentage of
teachers rated
effective on
classroom
practices19
% TBD TBD TBD TBD Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Number of teachers
assessed as
effective/Total
number of teachers
observed using
CLASS
Objective Indicator 3: Improve primary school leadership and accountability
Percentage of
primary schools
with a School
Improvement
Plans (SIP)
focused on
learning
outcomes
% 0% 0% 25% 50%
Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
No. of primary
schools with SIPS
focused on
learning/Total No. of
primary schools
Percentage of
school leaders
reporting on
progress of
teachers practices
and students
learning to
oversight bodies
% 0% 0% 25% 50%
Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
No. of primary school
leaders reporting
progress on teacher
practices and student
learning/Total No. of
primary school
leaders
Objection 4: initiate the strengthening of sector monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management and decision
making.
19
Capacity building for respective staff of the Ministries of Education is ongoing. Baseline data will be available by August 2016
22
Production of an
annual report on
plan
implementation
and performance
indicators at the
country level
YES/NO NO YES YES YES
MOE
Statistics
and Planning
Units
Country annual report
on Plan
implementation and
performance
indicators
.
Intermediate Results Indicators
Component 1 – Curriculum and assessment
Learners-centere
d assessment
framework and
guidelines for
using learning
standards
approved
YES/NO NO YES
Once
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Component 2 – Teacher Professional Development
Teacher
professional
development
course developed
YES/NO NO YES
Number of
teachers trained
and certified as
competent
#
Cumulative 0 0 44 87
Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Component 3 – School Leadership and Accountability
Handbook for
school leaders
developed and
printed
YES/NO NO YES
Handbook
23
School
leadership
training
program
developed
YES/NO NO YES
Course
Number of
school leaders
certified in a
competence
based standards
# Cumulative 0 0 27 54
Annual
Project
Implementati
on Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Component 4 – Project implementation, monitoring, and evaluation.
Number of
teachers
monitored
through the
Classroom
Assessment
Scoring System
(CLASS)
#
Cumulative 0 32 49 65
Annual
Project
Implementati
on Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Number of
schools
analyzing and
using student
learning data
#
Cumulative 0 26 38 57
M&E Manual
developed YES/NO NO YES
Manual
24
ANNEX 1 C. RESULTS FRAMEWORK GRENADA
Expected Impact: Improved learning outcomes (expected to happen beyond project completion, except perhaps for Grade 2 performance). Equity considerations:
gender, income, location, disability, ethnic groups
Project Development Objectives: The objectives of the proposed project are to (a) use learning standards to support evidence-based teaching and
learning; (b) improve teacher practices at the primary level; (c) strengthen primary school leadership and accountability; and (d) initiate the
strengthening of sector monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management and decision making.
Indicator Name Core Unit of
Measure
Baseline
(GPE
2016)
Cumulative Target Values Frequency
Data Source
/Methodology
Resp. for
Data
Collection
Description
2017 2018 2019 2020
Impact Indicators
Primary School literacy Skills
% of pupils reading at or above their grade level at the key stages of grade 2 by gender, urban-rural residence
Primary School Mathematics Skills
% of pupils by gender and urban-rural residence performing at or above the minimum standards at grade 2 in Mathematics
Project Development Objective Indicators
PDO Indicator 1: Use learning standards to support evidence-based teaching and learning at the primary level
Percentage of
primary teachers
using formative
assessment based
on learning
standards
%
0
0
25
50
Annual
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Dpt
#of teachers using
formative
assessment/Total # of
primary school
teachers
Objective Indicator 2: Improve teacher practices at the primary level
25
Percentage of
teachers rated
effective on
classroom
practices20
% TBD TBD TBD TBD Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Number of teachers
assessed as
effective/Total
number of teachers
observed using
CLASS
Objective Indicator 3: Improve primary school leadership and accountability
Percentage of
primary schools
with a School
Improvement
Plans (SIP)
focused on
learning
outcomes
% 0% 0% 25% 50%
Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
No. of primary
schools with SIPS
focused on
learning/Total No. of
primary schools
Percentage of
school leaders
reporting on
progress of
teachers practices
and students
learning to
oversight bodies
% 0% 0% 25% 50%
Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
No. of primary school
leaders reporting
progress on teacher
practices and student
learning/Total No. of
primary school
leaders
Objection 4: initiate the strengthening of sector monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management and decision
making.
20
Capacity building for respective staff of the Ministries of Education is ongoing. Baseline data will be available by August 2016
26
Production of an
annual report on
plan
implementation
and performance
indicators at the
country level
YES/NO NO YES YES YES
MOE
Statistics
and Planning
Units
Country annual report
on Plan
implementation and
performance
indicators
.
Intermediate Results Indicators
Component 1 – Curriculum and assessment
Learners-centere
d assessment
framework and
guidelines for
using learning
standards
approved
YES/NO NO YES
Once
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Component 2 – Teacher Professional Development
Teacher
professional
development
course developed
YES/NO NO YES
Number of
teachers trained
and certified as
competent
#
Cumulative 0 0 72 144
Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Component 3 – School Leadership and Accountability
Handbook for
school leaders
developed and
printed
YES/NO NO YES
Handbook
27
School
leadership
training
program
developed
YES/NO NO YES
Course
Number of
school leaders
certified in a
competence
based standards
# Cumulative 0 0 36 72
Annual
Project
Implementati
on Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Component 4 – Project implementation, monitoring, and evaluation.
Number of
teachers
monitored
through the
Classroom
Assessment
Scoring System
(CLASS)
#
Cumulative 0 53 80 107
Annual
Project
Implementati
on Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Number of
schools
analyzing and
using student
learning data
#
Cumulative 0 37 53 80
M&E Manual
developed YES/NO NO YES
Manual
28
ANNEX 1 D. RESULTS FRAMEWORK SAINT LUCIA
Expected Impact: Improved learning outcomes (expected to happen beyond project completion, except perhaps for Grade 2 performance). Equity considerations:
gender, income, location, disability, ethnic groups
Project Development Objectives: The objectives of the proposed project are to (a) use learning standards to support evidence-based teaching and
learning; (b) improve teacher practices at the primary level; (c) strengthen primary school leadership and accountability; and (d) initiate the
strengthening of sector monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management and decision making.
Indicator Name Core Unit of
Measure
Baseline
(GPE
2016)
Cumulative Target Values Frequency
Data Source
/Methodology
Resp. for
Data
Collection
Description
2017 2018 2019 2020
Impact Indicators
Primary School literacy Skills
% of pupils literacy at or above their grade level at the key stages of grade 2 by gender, urban-rural residence
Primary School Mathematics Skills
% of pupils by gender and urban-rural residence performing at or above the minimum standards at grade 2 in Mathematics
Project Development Objective Indicators
PDO Indicator 1: Use learning standards to support evidence-based teaching and learning at the primary level
Percentage of
primary teachers
using formative
assessment based
on learning
standards
%
0
0
25
50
Annual
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Dpt
#of teachers using
formative
assessment/Total # of
primary school
teachers
Objective Indicator 2: Improve teacher practices at the primary level
29
Percentage of
teachers rated
effective on
classroom
practices21
% TBD TBD TBD TBD Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Number of teachers
assessed as
effective/Total
number of teachers
observed using
CLASS
Objective Indicator 3: Improve primary school leadership and accountability
Percentage of
primary schools
with a School
Improvement
Plans (SIP)
focused on
learning
outcomes
% 0% 0% 25% 50%
Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
No. of primary
schools with SIPS
focused on
learning/Total No. of
primary schools
Percentage of
school leaders
reporting on
progress of
teachers practices
and students
learning to
oversight bodies
% 0% 0% 25% 50%
Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
No. of primary school
leaders reporting
progress on teacher
practices and student
learning/Total No. of
primary school
leaders
Objection 4: initiate the strengthening of sector monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management and decision
making.
21
Capacity building for respective staff of the Ministries of Education is ongoing. Baseline data will be available by August 2016
30
Production of an
annual report on
plan
implementation
and performance
indicators at the
country level
YES/NO NO YES YES YES
MOE
Statistics
and Planning
Units
Country annual report
on Plan
implementation and
performance
indicators
.
Intermediate Results Indicators
Component 1 – Curriculum and assessment
Learners-centere
d assessment
framework and
guidelines for
using learning
standards
approved
YES/NO NO YES
Once
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Component 2 – Teacher Professional Development
Teacher
professional
development
course developed
YES/NO NO YES
Number of
teachers trained
and certified as
competent
#
Cumulative 0 0 88 177
Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Component 3 – School Leadership and Accountability
Handbook for
school leaders
developed and
printed
YES/NO NO YES
Handbook
31
School
leadership
training
program
developed
YES/NO NO YES
Course
Number of
school leaders
certified in a
competence
based standards
# Cumulative 0 0 39 77
Annual
Project
Implementati
on Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Component 4 – Project implementation, monitoring, and evaluation.
Number of
teachers
monitored
through the
Classroom
Assessment
Scoring System
(CLASS)
#
Cumulative 0 66 98 131
Annual
Project
Implementati
on Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Number of
schools
analyzing and
using student
learning data
#
Cumulative 0 36 52 78
M&E Manual
developed YES/NO NO YES
Manual
32
ANNEX 1 E. RESULTS FRAMEWORK FOR SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES
Expected Impact: Improved learning outcomes (expected to happen beyond project completion, except perhaps for Grade 2 performance). Equity considerations:
gender, income, location, disability, ethnic groups
Project Development Objectives: The objectives of the proposed project are to (a) use learning standards to support evidence-based teaching and
learning; (b) improve teacher practices at the primary level; (c) strengthen primary school leadership and accountability; and (d) initiate the
strengthening of sector monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management and decision making.
Indicator Name Core Unit of
Measure
Baseline
(GPE
2016)
Cumulative Target Values Frequency
Data Source
/Methodology
Resp. for
Data
Collection
Description
2017 2018 2019 2020
Impact Indicators
Primary School literacy Skills
% of pupils literacy at or above their grade level at the key stages of grade 2 by gender, urban-rural residence
Primary School Mathematics Skills
% of pupils by gender and urban-rural residence performing at or above the minimum standards at grade 2 in Mathematics
Project Development Objective Indicators
PDO Indicator 1: Use learning standards to support evidence-based teaching and learning at the primary level
Percentage of
primary teachers
using formative
assessment based
on learning
standards
%
0
0
25
50
Annual
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Dpt
#of teachers using
formative
assessment/Total # of
primary school
teachers
Objective Indicator 2: Improve teacher practices at the primary level
33
Percentage of
teachers rated
effective on
classroom
practices22
% TBD TBD TBD TBD Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Number of teachers
assessed as
effective/Total
number of teachers
observed using
CLASS
Objective Indicator 3: Improve primary school leadership and accountability
Percentage of
primary schools
with a School
Improvement
Plans (SIP)
focused on
learning
outcomes
% 0% 0% 25% 50%
Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
No. of primary
schools with SIPS
focused on
learning/Total No. of
primary schools
Percentage of
school leaders
reporting on
progress of
teachers practices
and students
learning to
oversight bodies
% 0% 0% 25% 50%
Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
No. of primary school
leaders reporting
progress on teacher
practices and student
learning/Total No. of
primary school
leaders
Objection 4: initiate the strengthening of sector monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management and decision
making.
22
Capacity building for respective staff of the Ministries of Education is ongoing. Baseline data will be available by August 2016
34
Production of an
annual report on
plan
implementation
and performance
indicators at the
country level
YES/NO NO YES YES YES
MOE
Statistics
and Planning
Units
Country annual report
on Plan
implementation and
performance
indicators
.
Intermediate Results Indicators
Component 1 – Curriculum and assessment
Learners-centere
d assessment
framework and
guidelines for
using learning
standards
approved
YES/NO NO YES
Once
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Component 2 – Teacher Professional Development
Teacher
professional
development
course developed
YES/NO NO YES
Number of
teachers trained
and certified as
competent
#
Cumulative 0 0 66 132
Annual
Project
Implementatio
n Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Education
Component 3 – School Leadership and Accountability
Handbook for
school leaders
developed and
printed
YES/NO NO YES
Handbook
35
School
leadership
training
program
developed
YES/NO NO YES
Course
Number of
school leaders
certified in a
competence
based standards
# Cumulative 0 0 34 67
Annual
Project
Implementati
on Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Component 4 – Project implementation, monitoring, and evaluation.
Number of
teachers
monitored
through the
Classroom
Assessment
Scoring System
(CLASS)
#
Cumulative 0 49 73 97
Annual
Project
Implementati
on Reports
MOE
Department
of Primary
Number of
schools
analyzing and
using student
learning data
#
Cumulative 0 40 57 86
M&E Manual
developed YES/NO NO YES
Manual
36
Annex 2: Detailed Project Description
OECS COUNTRIES: Support to Implementation of the Regional Education Strategy
1. The objectives of the proposed project are to (a) use quality learning standards to support
evidence-based teaching and learning at the primary level; (b) improve teacher practices at the
primary level; (c) strengthen primary school leadership and accountability; and (d) initiate the
strengthening of sector M&E capacity in support of evidence-based strategic management and
decision making, all in the member countries. The goal is to improve learning achievement but
given the short time frame for implementation (only three years) it is unlikely that changes will
be seen in learning achievement during the implementation period. The expected theory of
change is as follows:
2. Component 1: Curriculum and Assessment. This component will support the
following activities:
(a) Reviewing the harmonized curriculum to clarify grade-level learning standards for
primary education in literacy, numeracy, science, and social studies through (i)
37
consultant services and (ii) the carrying out of consultations at the regional and
member country levels
(b) Developing a learner-centered assessment framework to monitor the achievement of
learning standards (formative assessment), through (i) provision of consultant
services and (ii) the carrying out of consultations at the regional and member
country levels
(c) Developing and implementing guidelines for using the learning standards and
formative classroom assessment through (i) the provision of consultant services; (ii)
the carrying out of consultations at the regional and member country levels; and (iii)
the adaptation of the learning standards and formative assessment to member
country level context.
3. Effective instruction relies on clear learning standards and a high-quality system of
assessment so that in the course of instruction, teachers have insight into student learning and can
adjust instruction accordingly. Effective assessment also ensures that stakeholders in the school
community are aware of how all students (boys and girls and regardless of social economic
background or disability) benefited from instruction—or how instruction might be modified.
Clear learning standards will help guide classroom practices, including systematic formative and
summative classroom assessment to address learning deficiencies before children transition to
the next grade or exit the system. The best-performing countries have established learning
standards and developed assessment systems to monitor their achievement (Barber and
Mourshed 2007;23
Mourshed, Chijioke, and Barber 201024
). Placing students’ outcomes as the
main goal of educational policies requires that the learning outcomes to be achieved at every
grade level are clearly specified and that the level of expected performance is clear.
4. The project will support the following activities: (a) consultant services to facilitate
clarification of grade-level learning standards; the consultant will also ensure international best
practices are incorporated while developing the learning standards; (b) consultant services to
facilitate development of a learner-centered assessment framework to include formative
classroom assessment based on learning standards; (c) consultations (both at the regional and
country levels) to enable a wide range of stakeholders to provide inputs to the draft learning
standards and assessment framework; (d) printing and distribution of the learning standards and
assessment framework after incorporating inputs from stakeholder consultations; (e) further
country-level forum to adapt the standards and assessment framework to the country-level
context; and (f) orientation training activities for directors of studies and school leaders and
education officers to the learning standards and assessment framework.
5. Learning assessment will be an integral part of a cycle of standards, curriculum, and
instruction that forms an ongoing feedback loop to provide desired information to teachers,
parents, and students. It will be an ongoing process of gathering evidence of what each student
actually knows, understands, and can do in relation to the learning standards and goals and will
23
Barber, M., and M. Mourshed. 2007. How the World's Best Performing School Systems Come Out on Top.
McKinsey and Company. 24
Mourshed, M, C. Chijioke, and M. Barber. 2010. How the World’s Most Improved School Systems Keep Getting
Better. McKinsey and Company.
38
serve various purposes. The proposed assessment framework will be comprehensive and will be
at three levels: (a) regional, (b) national, and (c) classroom.
6. Assessment will serve the following purposes: (a) provide information that can help
ensure responsiveness to the needs of all students; (b) provide feedback to students, educators,
parents, policymakers, and the public about learner’s progress and the effectiveness of
educational services; (c) assessment results will be used to improve instruction to respond to
student learning needs and ensure that all students attain the defined learning goals; (d) help
teachers and school leaders make informed decisions about which strategies need to be
strengthened, how instructional strategies can be modified depending on what students
understand or misunderstand in the course of instruction, and whether or not instruction has been
successful; and (e) provide valuable information on the type of professional development
activities needed to improve teachers’ instructional practices.
7. The assessment framework will include three types of assessment.
Classroom or formative assessment will provide teachers and pupils with timely
feedback on student knowledge and ability to guide shifts in instruction instructional
plans and student learning. Research has demonstrated that formative assessments
improve student learning, with the largest gains among the lowest-performing
students (Black and William 1998).25
Formative assessments play a critical role in
narrowing learning gaps between student groups and can be used as a tool for
ensuring equitable access to learning opportunities in classrooms. Effective
formative assessment processes provide immediate, actionable data about classroom
learning to help teachers adjust their teaching practices. Formative tools help
teachers and students gauge learning, which can lead to more targeted student
questions and learning activities. Teachers can use formative assessment tools to
provide corrective feedback, modify their instruction, or identify areas where
additional instruction and other support is needed. Formative assessment will be the
main focus of the assessment reform.
Examinations for making decisions about each individual student’s progress
through the education system will be conducted at the end of the primary school
cycle and will be standardized and conducted at the regional level.
System-level assessment will be undertaken at grades 2 and 4 for monitoring and
providing policymakers and practitioners with relevant information of overall
performance levels in the system, changes in these levels over time, and related
contributing factors. These will be standardized and will be performed at national
level although they can also be compared at the regional level.
8. Component 2: Teacher Professional Development. This component will support the
following activities: (a) reviewing the teacher training programs in member countries; (b)
reviewing classroom practices in member countries to understand current practices and identify
capacity gaps; (c) developing a teacher professional development course and school-based 25
Black, Paul, and Dylan William. 1998. “Assessment and Classroom Learning.” Assessment in Education:
Principles, Policy and Practice 5 (1): 7–74. DOI:10.1080/0969595980050102
39
professional learning communities to improve classroom practices (use of formative assessment,
teacher-student interaction, and use of student learning data through consultant services; (d)
carrying out competence-based professional development activities for teachers26
in the member
countries through training on effective classroom practices, formative assessment, all in line with
learning standards and the use of student learning data; and (e) establishing an online community
of practice for teachers to access online instructional resources and share lesson plans and
experiences.
9. Teachers’ content knowledge and classroom practices are the single strongest in-school
predictor of student achievement (Barber and Mourshed 2007). Teacher professional
development will commence in the second year following materials development and consensus
building activities which will take place during the first year of implementation.. Teacher
professional development will be in the form of school-based professional learning communities.
This will include workshops and teachers’ engagement in ongoing self-reflection, peer support,
experimentation, and modification of instruction and management practices based on student
performance data, student work, and both learning and social behaviors embedded in teachers’
everyday teaching routine. Through an intensive process of collaborative and job-embedded
learning, teachers can gain content knowledge, technical strategies, and an improved
understanding of their own teaching and learning and of the various ways by which students
learn (Darlington-Hammond et al. 2009).27
It is therefore an ongoing professional learning
process grounded in teachers’ everyday work to support student success.
10. Teacher professional development will be competence based and will focus on improving
classroom practices, including emotional support, classroom organization, instructional support28
(to ensure that teachers understand the components of their teaching that matter for their student
achievement), formative assessment, and use of assessment information to tailor support to
student learning needs. It will be an ongoing professional learning process grounded in teachers’
everyday instructional routines to support student success. In addition to the face-to-face
professional training for teachers, the professional learning will involve teachers meeting on a
regular schedule in learning teams organized by grade-level or content-area assignments and
sharing responsibility for their students’ success. Learning teams will follow a cycle of
continuous improvement that begins with examining student data to determine the areas of
greatest student need, pinpointing areas where additional teacher learning is necessary,
identifying and creating learning experiences to address these needs, developing and sharing
lesson plans and assessments, applying new strategies in the classroom, reflecting on their
impact on student learning, and repeating the cycle with new goals. The project will also support
establishment of an online community of practice for teachers and school leaders to further
enhance professional collaboration. Teacher professional development will start with Pre-K
teachers.
26
The number of teachers in the four countries is as follows: Dominica (511); Grenada (903); St. Lucia (1,071); St.
Vincent and the Grenadines (819). 27
Darling-Hammond, Linda, Ruth Chung Wei, Alethea Andree, Nikole Richardson, and Stelios Orphanos. 2009.
Professional Learning in the Learning Profession: A Status Report on Teacher Development in the United States
and Abroad. Dallas, TX: National Staff Development Council. The School Redesign Network at Stanford
University. 28
Based on CLASS. Capacity building for CLASS is being undertaken in the four OECS states.
40
11. Component 3: Improve School Leadership and Accountability. This component will
support the following activities: (a) developing a school leader training program based on
professional standards, including instructional leadership to support teachers to improve
instructional practices; (b) carrying out competence-based training and certification activities for
school leaders based on leadership standards, including on instructional leadership and use of
data in planning, management, and reporting; and (c) developing a handbook for school
principals/leaders to guide school leadership and management.
12. Based on lessons from international experience, strategies will focus on developing and
strengthening skills for dealing with the roles that contribute to improving school outcomes: (a)
developing and evaluating teacher quality; (b) promoting cooperation and collaboration; (c) goal
setting and performance accountability; (d) enhancing financial and human resource
management, (e) outreach beyond school boarders; (f) focus on the instructional function; and
(g) education of boys. Leadership learning would be based on leadership standards and grounded
in practice, including analysis of classroom practice; mentoring and peer coaching; and collegial
learning networks that offer communities of practice and ongoing sources of support.
13. The development of leadership capacity will be done through the following activities: (a)
development of a program for training of school leaders focused on leadership practices based on
agreed professional standards, including instructional leadership, and to support teachers to
improve instruction; (b) competence-based training and certification of school leaders based on
agreed OECS leadership standards, including on instructional leadership and use of data,
planning, management, and reporting; and (c) development of a handbook for school
principals/leaders to guide school leadership and management.
14. Component 4: Project implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. This component
will support project implementation and M&E through (a) the procurement and FM requirements
of the project; (b) process monitoring of the teacher and school leader professional development
activities; (c) the establishment of the national routines for ongoing and regular monitoring of
learning standards and assessment using available data and additional research; (d) the
monitoring of teacher classroom practices through CLASS; and (e) the carrying out of annual
regional and country-level program reviews.
15. This component will support project implementation and administration and ensure
appropriate M&E of project implementation and impact, as well as of fiduciary aspects. No
separate project-specific implementation unit will be established at either the OECS Commission
or country level. Rather, the head of the EDMU at the OECS Commission will be the de facto
project manager working closely with the chief education officers to make key policy and
strategic decisions. To support the day-to-day implementation of these decisions, they will be
supported by the fiduciary staff of the OECS Commission
16. Classroom practices will be monitored using CLASS—a rigorous monitoring system that
can be used to provide feedback on the quality of teaching practices. Research has demonstrated
that CLASS objectively identifies and assesses multiple dimensions of instructional quality that
are linked to student achievement across a range of grades (pre-primary to secondary), content,
and country contexts. Without improving instructional interactions between teachers and
students, other resources such as qualified teachers or costly curricular materials are not likely to
41
have an impact on student learning (Cohen, Raudenbush, and Ball 2003).29
A growing body of
evidence indicates that the effectiveness of teachers’ instructional practice has an impact on
student learning (Tomlinson et al. 2006).30
Instructional strategies such as effective use of
targeted direct instruction, modeling, and two-way feedback among students and teachers are
associated with improved student achievement. The quality of the instruction teachers deliver has
a striking impact on student achievement when instruction is differentiated to accommodate
students’ learning styles, backgrounds, perspectives, and cultural identities while maintaining the
cognitive demand of instructional tasks. Moreover, CLASS-based professional development has
demonstrated that teachers can improve their teacher-student interactions leading to gains in
student outcomes through providing reliable data on teacher classroom practices and a common
language that identifies dimensions of effective teaching practices across subject areas and grade
levels.
17. CLASS focuses on three domains of instructional interactions:
Emotional support
Classroom organization
Instructional support
18. Within each of these three domains, there are dimensions of the quality of instructional
interactions rated on a 7-point scale (Low 1, 2; Mid 3, 4, 5 (effective); High 6, 7) from Pre-K to
12th grade.
Emotional Support
(a) Positive climate. Reflects the emotional connection between the teacher and
students and among students and the warmth, respect, and enjoyment communicated
by verbal and nonverbal interactions.
(b) Negative climate. Reflects the overall level of expressed negativity in the
classroom; the frequency, quality, and intensity of teacher and peer negativity are
key to this scale.
(c) Teacher sensitivity. Encompasses the teacher’s awareness of and responsiveness to
students’ academic and emotional needs; high levels of sensitivity facilitate
students’ ability to actively explore and learn because the teacher consistently
provides comfort, reassurance, and encouragement.
(d) Regard for student perspective. Captures the degree to which the teacher’s
interactions with students and classroom activities place an emphasis on students’
interests, motivations, and points of view and encourage student responsibility and
29
Cohen D. K., S. W. Raudenbush, D. L. Ball. 2003. “Resources, Instruction, and Research.” Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 30
Tomlinson, Carol Ann, and Jay McTighe. 2006. Integrating Differentiated Instruction and Understanding by
Design: Connected Content and Kids. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
42
autonomy.
Classroom Organization
(e) Behavior management. Encompasses the teacher’s ability to provide clear
behavioral expectations and use effective methods to prevent and redirect
misbehavior.
(f) Productivity. Considers how well the teacher manages instructional time and
routines and provides activities for students so that they have the opportunity to be
involved in learning activities.
(g) Instructional learning formats. Focuses on the way in which the teacher
maximizes students’ interest, engagement, and ability to learn from lessons and
activities.
Instructional Support
(h) Concept development (Grades K–3). Measures the teacher’s use of instructional
discussions and activities to promote students’ higher-order thinking skills and
cognition and the teacher’s focus on understanding rather than on rote instruction.
(i) Content understanding (Grades 4–12). The depth of the lesson content and the
approaches used to help students comprehend the framework, key ideas, and
procedures in an academic discipline. At a high level, this refers to interactions
among the teacher and students that lead to an integrated understanding of facts,
skills, concepts, and principles.
(j) Quality of feedback. Assesses the degree to which the teacher provides feedback
that expands learning and understanding and encourages continued participation.
(k) Analysis and inquiry (Grades 4–12). Assesses the degree to which students are
engaged in higher-level thinking skills through the application of knowledge and
skills to novel and/or open-ended problems, tasks, and questions. Opportunities for
engaging in metacognition, that is, thinking about thinking are also included.
(l) Language modeling (Grades K–3). Captures the quality and amount of the
teacher’s use of language-stimulation and language-facilitation techniques.
(m) Instructional dialogue (Grades–12). Captures the purposeful use of
content-focused discussion among teachers and students that is cumulative, with the
teacher supporting students to chain ideas together in ways that lead to deeper
understanding of content. Students take an active role in these dialogues and both
the teacher and students use strategies that facilitate extended dialogue.
19. CLASS is particularly relevant to the OECS for two reasons. First, there is currently no
system in place to measure teacher-child interactions, and therefore, data are limited to fully
evaluate the classroom environment and identify best practices. Second, CLASS will shed
43
considerable insight into the effectiveness of the teacher-training program and inform teacher
professional development.
20. Capacity building for CLASS has been undertaken using the GPE grant as part of the
Quality Education Framework. The capacity building covers the following areas: (a) training and
certification of CLASS observers who will monitor classroom practices; (b) training of trainers;
and (c) training of school leaders and instructional coaches to implement professional learning
communities with coaching to improve instruction. Table 2.1 provides a summary of activities to
be implemented at the regional and country levels.
Outcome Regional-Level Activities to be led by the
OECS Commission National-Level Activities
Curriculum and
assessment
(a) Review the harmonized curriculum to
clarify grade-level learning standards
(b) Develop learning standards framework
(c) Develop a learner-centered assessment
framework
(a) Adapt learning standards to
country level
(b) Implement learning standards and
learner-centered assessment
Teacher
professional
development
(a) Review teacher training programs
(b) Review classroom practices to understand
current practices and identify gaps
(c) Develop professional development
program for teachers
(d) Develop community of practice for
teachers
(a) Country-level consultations and
promotion of improved teaching
practices
(b) Competency-based professional
development for teachers on
effective classroom practices, the
use of formative classroom
assessments, and the use of data to
improve teaching
Strengthening
leadership
(a) Develop a competency-based program for
training and certification of school leaders
based on leadership standards, to support
teachers to improve classroom practices
and use data to improve instruction
(b) Develop a handbook for school leaders
(c) Monitor and evaluate implementation and
promotion of knowledge sharing across
countries
(a) Competency-based training and
certification of school leaders
based on leadership standards to
support teachers to improve
classroom practices and use of
student learning data to improve
instruction
(b) Monitoring of classroom practices
44
Annex 3: Implementation Arrangements
OECS COUNTRIES: Support to Implementation of the Regional Education Strategy
Project Administration
1. The OECS Commission will be the implementing agency for the project. Implementation
at the regional level will be coordinated by the EDMU of the OECS Commission. The head of
the EDMU will be the project coordinator and responsible for the day-to-day management of the
project. The EDMU will also be the main focal point for monitoring the implementation of the
regional activities, including the collection and reporting on the results. It would organize regular
fora for reviewing progress and sharing lessons learned from the overall program, share best
practices, and promote knowledge exchange between countries. The fiduciary responsibilities
would be managed by the respective units at the OECS Commission. The OECS Commission
managed the Institutional Development Grant, which supported development of the Regional
Education Strategy and has implemented other Bank-financed projects.
2. The Chief Education Officers and Planners’ Forum will act as the Project Steering
Committee. This committee will offer advice and guidance on the project.
Institutional and Implementation Arrangements at the National Level
3. As part of the regional arrangements for implementing the OESS, the program
implementation at the national level will be mainstreamed into the MOE. This model is in
response to previous experience where projects were perceived as competing priorities outside
the scope of the work program of the MOE. The national-level counterpart will be the chief
education officer who may designate a national focal point. The actual implementation will be
managed by the units responsible for the various program components. For example, the
curriculum and assessment components will be implemented by the Curriculum Unit with the
head of the Curriculum Unit having direct responsibility for related activities. Similarly
education officers with responsibility for teacher training and school leadership—usually a
senior education officer—will be responsible for activities related to their respective portfolios.
Implementation calls for a high level of coordination between various units and education
officers. This coordination will be managed by the chief education officer or a delegated focal
point. The focal point will coordinate closely with all relevant stakeholders and beneficiaries,
and organize national consultation meetings of various aspects of the project.
4. The potential risk posed by shortage of skilled staff is lessened by the proposed approach
to implementation resulting in the spread of tasks and responsibilities across several units and
individuals. The proposed project activities will be included in the unit work plan that
incorporates the program activities. This approach continues to work well for the regional
activities that are agreed upon by the countries—since there is buy-in from the highest level of
the ministry.
45
Financial Management
FM Assessment and Mitigating Actions (if any)
5. Conclusion. The Bank performed an FM assessment of this proposed project in
accordance with OP/BP 10.00 and the Financial Management Practice Manual (issued by the
Financial Management Sector Board on March 1, 2010). In the FM specialist’s opinion, the
implementing agency (the OECS Commission) has in place an FM system that will be able to
provide, with reasonable assurance, accurate and timely information on the status of the funds as
required by the Bank.
6. Risk assessment. The overall FM risk rating assigned to this project is Low. This is
because the OECS Commission is an existing implementing agency and the grant will mainly
cover consultancy-based activities, which will be monitored closely by the task team. The FM
specialist will monitor the project FM risk during project implementation. The following risks
with corresponding mitigation measures have been identified during the assessment.
Risk Risk
Rating Risk Issues/Measures
Inherent risk
Country level Moderate
Entity and project level Low FM arrangements are in place and functioning adequately.
Control risk
Budgeting Low A budget for the entire life of the project will be prepared with
assistance from the Bank task team.
Internal controls Moderate –
Accounting/financial
reporting Low –
Funds flow/disbursement Low –
Staffing Low Staff has limited experience with Bank projects; however, they have a
vast amount of experience with implementing other donor projects.
External audits Low One audit will be performed covering the life of the project.
7. Implementing agency. The OECS Commission based in St. Lucia has the responsibility
for the implementation and FM of this grant. The fiduciary arrangements will be intertwined in
the current structure of the OECS Commission and its Finance Department, which has ample
experience with implementing donor-funded projects.
8. Staffing. The Finance Department will have direct oversight of the project’s accounting.
The department comprises four persons (financial controller, senior project accountant, and two
accounting assistants) who are assigned to various functions and reporting relationships to ensure
that there is proper segregation of duties as well as appropriate review of outputs.
9. Budgeting. A budget for all the activities of the grant for the entire implementation
period will be prepared at the beginning of the grant by the technical team at the OECS
Commission and the Bank. The budget will be revised each fiscal year and on an ad hoc basis,
46
based on implementation progress. The annual work plan will be derived from this master budget
and included in Sage 50 (the OECS Commission’s accounting system).
10. Internal controls. The OECS Commission’s Financial Regulations and Rules of the
Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (2015) has a comprehensive guidance on the daily
accounting procedures. Currently the Internal Audit Unit has no staff due to recent resignations
and the OECS Commission has indicated that the two posts should be filled within the next six
months. However, the procedures and controls seem to be functioning effectively and efficiently.
The grant will be guided by the abovementioned manual and inclusions of project-specific
processes will be done as soon as the project becomes effective.
11. Funds flow and disbursement arrangements. Disbursement of project funds will be
based on IFRs. Funds should only be used for implementation of the components as set out in the
Financing Agreement and all disbursement must comply with the disbursement categories. A
segregated U.S. dollar designated account and local currency project account will be opened
upon effectiveness of the project at First National Bank in St. Lucia and the bank account and
bank information will be conveyed to the Bank. The operation of the bank accounts will fall
under the current operations processes of the OECS Commission.
12. Accounting and financial reporting. The Finance Department in the OECS
Commission will be responsible for producing the IFRs on a semester (six-month) basis (July–
December and January–June) and submitted no later than 45 days after the end of each reporting
period to the Bank. These reports will provide required monitoring information and should be
made available to both the internal and external auditors. Accounting records will be kept in the
accounting system, Sage 50, and will be updated and monitored in accordance with the financial
regulations manual of the OECS Commission. The current Operations Manual is very
comprehensive and the processes and procedures once applied consistently are adequate to
ensure that the financial information is accurate and funds are only utilized for project purposes.
13. External auditing. Two audits will be performed to cover the life of the project (three
years) as the project’s FM risk is low and activities are not complex and will be closely
monitored by the Bank’s task team. Each audit will cover 1.5 years of the 3-year life of the
project. The project’s audit reports should be submitted to the Bank for review no later than six
months following the end of each audit period and will be performed by the same auditor that
audits the OECS Commission at that time. The OECS Commission carries out a tendering
process to select the auditor every three years and that selection process is adequate. The fiscal
year of the OECS Commission is July to June.
Procurement
General
14. Procurement for the proposed Recipient Executed Trust Fund grant will be carried out in
accordance with the Bank’s ‘Guidelines: Procurement of Goods, Works, and Non-Consulting
Services under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits and Grants’, dated January 2011 and revised July
2014; ‘Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants under IBRD Loans and IDA
Credits and Grants by World Bank Borrowers’, dated January 2011 and revised July 2014; the
47
IDA Anticorruption Guidelines dated July 1, 2005, and as amended October 15, 2006; and the
provisions stipulated in the Financial Agreement. The various procurement actions under
different expenditure categories are described in general below. For each contract to be financed
under the Financial Agreement, the various procurement or consultant selection methods, the
estimated costs, prior/post review requirements, and time frame have been agreed between the
recipient and the Bank in the Procurement Plan. The Procurement Plan will be updated at least
annually or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements in
institutional capacity.
Procurement Arrangements
15. Procurement of goods and non-consulting services. Procurement of goods and services
other than consulting services would include printing services in support of the project
implementation and training materials. Procurement of non-consulting services will be carried
out using International Competitive Bidding (ICB), National Competitive Bidding (NCB),
Shopping and other methods indicated in the Financing Agreement. The procurement will be
carried out using the Bank’s Standard Bidding Documents and other sample documents and
templates, all agreed upon with the Bank. The procurement methods thresholds and prior review
thresholds for works are indicated in Table 3.2, Error! Reference source not found., and
Error! Reference source not found.. Domestic preferences in accordance with clause 2.55 and
ppendix 2 of the guidelines will not apply.
16. Selection of consultants. Consultants’ services contracts procured under this grant will
include consultancy to strengthen curriculum standards and assessment framework; consultancy
to improve teacher training programs and strengthen teaching practice; consultancy to strengthen
leadership and accountability of school principals; and M&E project consultancy; and so on. The
following selection methods will be used: Quality- and Cost-Based Selection (QCBS),
Least-Cost Selection (LCS), Selection Based on the Consultants’ Qualifications (CQS),
Individual Consultants, and other selection methods indicated in the Financing Agreement. The
selections will be done using the Bank’s standard Request for Proposal and other sample
documents and templates, all agreed upon with the Bank. Short lists of consultants for services
estimated to cost less than US$300,000 equivalent per contract may be composed entirely of
national consultants in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2.7 of the Consultant
Guidelines.
17. Operating costs. This refers to incremental operating costs incurred by the OECS
Commission on account of project implementation, management, and monitoring, including
dissemination of project-related information and publications, office rent and utilities, office and
equipment insurance, maintenance and repair, vehicle insurance, local travel, communication,
translation and interpretation, bank charges, and other miscellaneous costs directly associated
with the project. All operating costs are based on periodic budgets and procured using the
implementing agencies’ administrative procedures acceptable to the Bank. Operating costs do
not include salaries of government officials and civil servants.
18. Training costs. The grant will finance training (workshops, and so on), as needed. The
training will be carried out according to training plans, which the OECS Commission will revise
semiannually and as needed and submit to the Bank for no objection prior to implementation.
48
The expenses will be covered under the training category and disbursed based on the statement
of expenses.
19. Procurement methods thresholds and prior review thresholds. The following
procurement methods thresholds and prior review thresholds will be used:
Expenditure Category Contract Value
(Threshold)
US$, thousands
Procurement Method Contracts Subject to
Prior Review
1. Works
> 3,000 ICB All
< 3,000 NCB First
< 200 Shopping None
> 100
< 100
Direct Contracting All
All justifications
2. Goods
> 500 ICB All
< 500 NCB First
< 100 Shopping None
> 100
< 100
Direct Contracting All
All justifications
3. Consulting Services
3.1 Firms > 300 QCBS, QBS, FBS, LCS All Contracts
< 300* QCBS, QBS, FBS, LCS,
CQS
First Contract and all
terms of reference by
task team leader
> 100
< 100
Single Source All
All justifications
3.2 Individuals > 300
< 300
Comparison of 3 CVs All
All terms of reference
by task team leader
Note: FBS = Selection under a Fixed Budget.
* Short list may comprise only national consultants.
20. Frequency of procurement supervision. Supervision of procurement will be carried out
primarily through post review done during supervision missions at least twice a year.
Procurement Capacity Assessment
Assessment of the Agency’s Capacity to Implement Procurement
21. An assessment of the capacity of the implementing agency (OECS Secretariat) to
implement procurement actions for the project was carried out in February 2016.
49
22. The procurement will be undertaken by the EDMU within the OECS Secretariat with the
support of the procurement specialist in the Functional Cooperation and Project Management
Unit of the OECS Secretariat with prior experience in implementing Bank-financed projects and
other donor-funded projects to work on this project procurement. The EDMU has experience in
carrying out consulting procurement processes in line with Bank Guidelines.
23. The key issues/risks concerning procurement for implementation of the project have been
identified during the assessment, as follows:
(a) No separate project-specific implementation unit would be established either at the
OECS Commission or country level.
(b) It is not envisaged at this point to hire a dedicated procurement officer to the unit to
directly support this project, although a procurement officer who is currently
supporting a U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) project will also
be providing support.
(c) The above points, (a) and (b), will be reviewed during implementation supervisions
and can be changed if deemed necessary.
24. The overall project risk for procurement is Moderate.
Project M&E
25. The details of the project M&E are included in annex 1.
Role of Partners
26. The development partners play a key technical and financial role in the project. The GPE
technical staff have worked closely with the Bank team during the preparation process and have
provided comments at various stages. The development partner group, especially the United
Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), has been working closely with the Bank team, organizing
joint activities (for example, the work on school leadership). The local education group
participated in reviewing and appraising the Education Sector Plan, which is the core document
around which the project has been designed. Several development partners, in particular,
Caribbean Development Bank, UNICEF, USAID, and United Nations Educational, Scientific,
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) are supporting specific actions within the Education
Sector Plan. The project will be coordinated by the OECS Commission at the regional level and
this will ensure coordination with other partners in implementation, M&E, and supervision
arrangements for the project.
50
Annex 4: Economic Analysis
OECS COUNTRIES: Support to Implementation of the Regional Education Strategy
1. It is expected that all four PDOs provide substantial economic benefits through their
contribution to improved educational quality. The analysis estimates the economic benefits
accruing from the first three PDOs: (a) use quality learning standards to support evidence-based
teaching and learning at the primary level; (b) improve teacher practices at the primary level; and
(c) strengthen primary school leadership and accountability. The benefits from the fourth PDO
are more difficult to predict and quantify and are therefore not included in the economic analysis.
The fourth PDO is (d) initiate the strengthening of sector M&E capacity in support of
evidence-based strategic management and decision making in all member countries.
2. The analysis estimates the total improvement in education quality due to the project
activities for participating children. These estimates were based on the results of rigorous impact
evaluation of similar programs on student learning. The analysis then calculates the monetary
benefit of this improved education quality in terms of gains in lifetime income. This final
calculation considered the results from Hanushek et al. (2015)31
that outlined that effects of
educational programs lead to higher returns to skills that affect the wages of beneficiaries.
3. The quantitative economic analysis shows a net benefit and positive return for the GPE
Project. With a 10 percent discount rate, the project has an NPV of US$11.1 million with an
internal rate of return of 27.0 percent. In addition, a sensitivity analysis to consider an alternative
worsening scenario, in which the effects of activities on students’ performance are assumed to be
only half as large, was carried out. Even in this alternative case, the project appears to be a good
investment from an economic point of view, with an NPV of US$5.5 million and an internal rate
of return of 20.2 percent.
4. Low quality of education has been highlighted, by the Caribbean Growth Forum, as the
major constraint to growth, employment, and poverty reduction. It is expected that as learning
achievement improves, more people will enter the labor market and the economic benefits of the
workforce affected by the project are expected to improve and more people will move out of
poverty. The PDOs are related to establish better learning standards, improve teacher
effectiveness in the classroom at the primary level, and strengthen school leadership and
accountability. The economic benefits of the project are expected due to the impact of better
schools on learning achievement of the students (Hanushek and Woessmann 2012).32
5. Public sector provision is justified based on the high social returns of the investment and
the reduction in poverty and inequality associated with it. Education in the OECS is
predominantly public and the project aims to support prerequisites to delivery of quality
education for all. Moreover, the project aims to support key aspects necessary to ensure the
provision of a public education service of quality. In addition, other factors provide an economic
rationale for public sector financing of primary education. For example, individuals acquiring
31
Hanushek, Eric A., Guido Schwerdt, Simon Wiederhold, and Ludger Woessmann. 2015. “Returns to Skills
around the World: Evidence from PIAAC.” European Economic Review 73: 103–130.
32 Hanushek, E. A., and L. Woessmann. 2012. “Do Better Schools Lead to More Growth? Cognitive Skills,
Economic Outcomes, and Causation.” Journal of Economic Growth 17 (4): 267–321.
51
better education contribute to the society because they are likely more engaged and responsible
citizens and better parents. This also increases the overall level of productivity and growth in the
economy.
6. The Bank has global experience in supporting government efforts to improve teacher
pedagogical practices and professional development, capacity for school leadership, and
monitoring student learning. It provides added value in this project through its technical expertise
and financing. The Bank has contributed and will contribute to develop the government’s
capacity under each component that supports the achievement of all three PDOs.