Malawi SABER Country Report Engaging the Private Sector in Education 2015 Policy Goals for Independent Private Schools Status 1. Encouraging Innovation by Providers Policies allow schools to make their own decisions on appointing, deploying, and dismissing teachers; determining teacher salary levels; and setting class size standards. Schools are restricted in their ability to determine teacher certification standards and methods for delivering the curriculum. 2. Holding Schools Accountable Standardized exams are administered annually to select grades of students; however, results are not disaggregated. Policy dictates that schools be inspected based on need and requires schools to submit action plans to district or divisional offices. No sanctions are administered based on the results of inspections or exams. 3. Empowering All Parents, Students, and Communities Examination results are published in terms of pass and fail percentages. There is no systematic way of reviewing the whole school such as school report cards. Parents and students participate in focus groups as part of the inspection process. The government does not provide tax subsidies or cash transfers to parents for their child to attend private independent schools. 4. Promoting Diversity of Supply No provider types are prohibited from operating private schools. There are no standardized school fee schedules and no explicit restrictions on tuition. Public and independent private schools have relatively equivalent operating standards; however, guidelines for school registration are not publicized. Independent schools are able to operate without paying regulatory fees. Policy Goals for Government-Funded Private Schools Status 1. Encouraging Innovation by Providers Policies allow schools to make their own decisions on appointing, deploying, and dismissing teachers; determining teacher salary levels; setting class size standards; and determining operating budgets. Schools are restricted in their ability to determine teacher certification standards and methods for delivering the curriculum. 2. Holding Schools Accountable Standardized exams are administered annually in select grades; however, results are not disaggregated. Policy dictates that schools be inspected regularly based on need and requires school to submit action plans to district or divisional offices. No sanctions or rewards are administered based on the results of inspections or exams. Schools are not required to report on the use of public funding. 3. Empowering All Parents, Students, and Communities Examination results are published in terms of pass and fail percentages. There is no systematic way of reviewing the whole school such as school report cards. Parents and students participate in focus groups as part of the inspection process. Schools are not prohibited from selecting students based on academic performance or geography. Schools are not prohibited from charging compulsory or voluntary fees. 4. Promoting Diversity of Supply Public and government-funded private schools experience relatively equivalent operating standards and receive equal funding. Schools do not receive initial funding to open. No policy requires government to inform schools of upcoming funding in advance. Registration guidelines are not made public. MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Overview of SABER-Engaging the Private Sector .................................................................................................................... 2 Benchmarking Education Policies: The SABER-EPS Methodology .......................................................................................... 4 Education in Malawi................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Private Education in Malawi ................................................................................................................................................... 7 Benchmarking Malawi’s Private School Policies ..................................................................................................................... 9 Goal 1: Encouraging Innovation by Providers ..................................................................................................................... 9 Goal 2: Holding Schools Accountable ............................................................................................................................... 10 Goal 3: Empowering all Parents, Students, and Communities ......................................................................................... 12 Goal 4: Promoting Diversity of Supply .............................................................................................................................. 14 From Analysis to Action: Policy Options for Malawi ............................................................................................................. 17 Policy Option 1: Concentrate on improving the quality of learning outcomes ................................................................ 17 Policy Option 2: Empower parents ................................................................................................................................... 18 Policy Option 3: Create a regulatory environment that encourages supply of education services ................................. 19 Acknowledgments................................................................................................................................................................. 20 References ............................................................................................................................................................................ 20 SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 1 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 world, using evidence-based frameworks to highlight the Introduction policies and institutions that matter most for promoting learning for all children and youth. In recent years, private sector engagement in education —which includes a vibrant mix of non-profit, for-profit SABER-EPS research in Malawi found that the net and faith-based organizations—has grown significantly enrollment rate for primary education has increased around the world. In the last two decades, the significantly, to 89 percent, while secondary net percentage of students in low-income countries enrollment rate remains low, at only 11 percent as of attending private primary schools doubled, from 11 2013 (the latest available data). At both the primary and percent to 22 percent (figure 1). This growth in private secondary levels, quality and equity are challenges. The provision is closely connected to the boom in access that private sector plays an increasingly significant role in has taken place in low-income countries over the same education at both levels. Based on a review of existing two decades: primary net enrollment increased from 55 policies, SABER-EPS offers the following percent to 80 percent between 1990 and 2010. recommendations for enhancing private sector engagement in the education sector in the country in As countries redouble their efforts to achieve learning order to meet the challenges of access, quality, and for all at the primary and secondary levels, the private equity: sector can be a resource for adding capacity to the education system. By partnering with private entities, 1) Concentrate on improving the quality of the state can provide access to more students, learning outcomes by encouraging continuous particularly poor students who are not always able to improvement at the school level by means of access existing education services (Pal and Kingdon 2010; school improvement planning and incentives. Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, and Guáqueta 2009; Hossain 2) Empower parents by ensuring that they 2007). Additionally, evidence shows that governments are given information on school quality that have been successful at improving education quality and enables them to make informed choices and student cognitive outcomes in many countries through b) are not hindered by restrictive school effective engagement with private education providers selection criteria. (Barrera-Osorio and Raju 2010; French and Kingdon 3) Create a regulatory environment that 2010; Barrera-Osorio 2006). encourages greater supply of school places to help overcome constraints, particularly at the Figure 1. Private Enrollment as a Percentage of Total secondary level. Primary Enrollments, by Country Income Level Low-income countries The rest of the report provides an overview of SABER- EPS, followed by a description of the primary and secondary education system in Malawi with a focus on the private sector and government policies related to the private provision of education. The report then benchmarks Malawi’s policy environment utilizing the Middle-income countries SABER-EPS Framework and offers policy options to enhance access and learning for all children in primary High-income countries and secondary school. Source: Baum et al (2014). This report presents an analysis of how effectively current policies in Malawi engage the private sector in primary and secondary education. The analysis draws on the Engaging the Private Sector (EPS) Framework, a product of the World Bank’s Systems Approach for Better Education Results (SABER). SABER collects and analyzes policy data on education systems around the SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 1 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Overview of SABER-Engaging the education system and, subsequently, have a positive impact on educational outcomes. Private Sector Box 1. Key Private Sector Engagement Policy Goals In many countries, the extent and activity of the private 1. Encouraging innovation by providers. Local decision sector in education is largely undocumented and making and fiscal decentralization can have positive unknown. SABER-EPS is working to help change that. effects on school and student outcomes. Most high- achieving countries allow schools autonomy in SABER-EPS assesses how well a country’s policies are managing resources (including personnel) and oriented toward ensuring that the services of non-state educational content. Local school autonomy can providers promote learning for all children and youth. improve the ability of disadvantaged populations to determine how local schools operate. The aim of SABER-EPS is not to advocate private 2. Holding schools accountable. If schools are given schooling. The intention is to outline the most effective autonomy over decision making, they must be held evidence-based policies specific to each country’s accountable for learning outcomes. Increases in current approach toward non-state provision of autonomy should be accompanied by standards and education. SABER-EPS assesses the extent to which interventions that increase access and improve quality. policies facilitate quality, access, and equity of private The state must hold all providers accountable to the education services. Data generated by SABER-EPS can same high standard. further the policy dialogue and support governments in 3. Empowering all parents, students, and communities . engaging private providers to improve education results. When parents and students have access to information on relative school quality, they can have the power to Four policy goals for engaging the private hold schools accountable and the voice to lobby sector governments for better-quality services. For empowerment to work equitably, options for parents SABER-EPS collects data on four key policy areas that and students should not depend on wealth or student international evidence has found effective for ability. strengthening accountability mechanisms among citizens, policymakers, and providers (box 1). These 4. Promoting diversity of supply. By facilitating market policy goals were identified through a review of rigorous entry for a diverse set of providers, governments can increase responsibility for results, as providers become research and analysis of top-performing and rapidly directly accountable to citizens as well as to the state. improving education systems. The four policy goals enable a government to increase innovation and strengthen accountability among the critical actors in an education system (figure 2). Empowering parents, students, and communities enhances the ability of parents to express their voice and hold policymakers accountable for results. Additionally, when parents are empowered, in most contexts, they can have greater influence over provider behaviors. Increasing school accountability strengthens the quality- and equity-assurance mechanisms between the state and education providers. Encouraging innovation and promoting diversity of supply can allow providers to respond to local needs. Increasing school-level autonomy in critical decisions improves the services provided to students. Allowing a diverse set of providers to enter the market can increase client power and enable citizens to choose from a wider range of models. By developing these policy goals, a government can improve the accountability of all providers in an SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 2 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Figure 2. Relationships of accountability for successful SABER-EPS analyzes laws and regulations to: (1) identify service delivery the types of private engagement that are legally established in each country and (2) assess each education system’s progress in achieving the four policy goals. The aim of the SABER-EPS Framework is to provide policy guidance to help governments establish strong incentives and relationships of accountability among citizens, governments, and private education providers, with the goal of improving education results. Source: Adapted from the World Bank (2003). SABER-EPS recognizes that the four policy goals outlined in box 1 can assist governments in raising accountability for the education services provided in their countries. The tool allows governments to systematically evaluate their policies and implement practices that are effective across multiple country contexts. Four types of private provision of education Across the world, governments can implement numerous strategies to improve educational outcomes by supporting non-state education provision. SABER-EPS benchmarks key policy goals across the four most common models of private service delivery: 1. Independent private schools: schools that are owned and operated by non-government providers and are financed privately, typically through fees. 2. Government-funded private schools: schools that are owned and operated by non- government providers, but receive government funding. 3. Privately managed schools: schools that are owned and financed by the government, but are operated by non-government providers. 4. Voucher schools: schools that students choose to attend with government-provided funding; these schools can be operated by the government or non-government providers or both, depending on the system. SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 3 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Benchmarking Education Policies: The The hypothetical country’s overall score for this policy goal would be: (2+3+4+4)/4 = 3.25. The overall score is SABER-EPS Methodology converted into a final development level for the policy goal, based on the following scale: The World Bank has developed a set of standardized Latent: 1.00 – 1.50 questionnaires and rubrics for collecting and evaluating Emerging: 1.51 – 2.50 data on the four policy goals for each type of private Established: 2.51 – 3.50 school engagement established in a given country. Advanced: 3.51 – 4.00 The policy goals are benchmarked separately for each The ratings generated by the rubrics are not meant to type of private engagement. A point of emphasis here is be additive across policy goals. That is, they are not that these tools only assess official and established added together to create an overall rating for engaging policies governing private education provision. the private sector. Additional tools determine on-the-ground implementation of these policies. The SABER-EPS information is compiled in a comparative database that Use of the SABER-EPS tool interested stakeholders can access for detailed reports, SABER-EPS is not intended to be used as a prescriptive background papers, methodology, and other resources; policy tool, but rather, as a tool to generate an informed the database details how different education systems assessment of a country’s policies vis- à-vis current engage with the private sector. knowledge about effective approaches. The results of this benchmarking exercise serve as a good starting point For each indicator associated with the respective four to discuss potential policy options that could be policy goals, the country receives a score between 1 and considered, based on the nuances of the local context 4 (figure 3), representing four levels of private sector and national education system. Education systems are engagement: 1 (latent), 2 (emerging), 3 (established), or likely to be at different levels of development across 4 (advanced). indicators and policy goals. While intuition suggests it is Figure 3. SABER rubric benchmarking levels probably better to be as developed in as many areas as possible, the evidence does not clearly show the need to be functioning at the advanced level for all policy goals. National education priorities lay at the center of recommended policy options; countries may prioritize higher levels of development in areas that contribute most to their immediate goals. For more information on the global evidence underlying EPS and its policy goals, see the SABER framework paper, “What Matters Most for Engaging the Private Sector in Education” (Baum et al. 2014). Source: Baum et al. (2014). The overall score for each policy goal is computed by aggregating the scores for each of its constituent indicators. For example, a hypothetical country receives the following indicator scores for one of its policy goals: Indicator A = 2 points Indicator B = 3 points Indicator C = 4 points Indicator D = 4 points SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 4 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Education in Malawi higher level of investment than the SSA average of 4.3 percent of GDP. Malawi is a low-income country in Sub-Saharan Africa.1 Gross domestic product per capita (current US$) in The education system in Malawi faces a number of Malawi is US$ 223. The country’s average annual growth challenges. A number of factors indicate that the system rate from 2002 to 2012 was 5.1 percent, although growth is over-burdened. The pupil-teacher ratio at the primary in 2012 was much lower, at 1.9 percent (World level is 74:1 (MEST 2012). Of pressing concern are issues Development Indicators). of student advancement and learning. Although schools have maintained high rates of student enrollment since Malawi recognizes education as a catalyst for socio- the abolition of school fees, only 51 percent of students economic development and industrial growth. The reach the last grade of primary schooling (Edstats). mission of the education system is to provide quality Furthermore, the country’s secondary enrollment rate relevant education to the Malawian nation (MEST 2008– dropped from 11.4 percent in 2010 to 10.9 percent in 17). Education in Malawi is regulated by the Education 2013 (NSO 2014). Act of 1962, although a new draft education bill is currently under consideration by its parliament. The In terms of the equity of educational access, Malawi has education system in Malawi follows an 8-4 structure: 8 experienced mixed results. Although enrollment in non-compulsory years of primary (Standards 1–8) and 4 primary schools has increased relatively consistently years of secondary (Forms 1–4) schooling (World Bank across household income quintiles, genders, and 2010). rural/urban localities, success in the education system has become more dependent on family wealth. Between As of 2013 the country had a primary net enrollment rate 2000 and 2010, for example, primary school completion of 89 percent—a direct result of the introduction of Free rates for the wealthiest quintile grew by 21 percentage Primary Education (FPE) in 1994. After the abolition of points (from 77 to 98 percent), while the rate for the school fees, school enrollments increased 50 percent— poorest quintile only grew by 2 percentage points (from from 1.9 to 2.9 million—in a single year (Ibid.). The gross 40 to 42 percent) (Edstats). Additionally, males slightly enrollment rate in Malawi is 141 percent, suggesting high outgained females in primary completion. During this levels of over-aged children as the result of late entrance same time period, however, the disparity between urban and repetition. Primary school completion rates are 68 and rural completion was cut in half (table 1). percent (World Bank 2013); however, the current secondary net enrollment rate is only 11 percent (NSO 2014). Between 1990 and 2010, the average years of schooling for people over the age of 15 in Malawi increased by nearly 2 years: from 2.9 to 4.7 (Barro and Lee 2012). Adult and youth literacy in the country is roughly equivalent to the regional Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) average: 61 percent of adults and 72 percent of youth are literate in Malawi, compared to 60 percent (adult) and 70 percent (youth) in SSA, respectively (World Development Indicators). Malawi spends 5.4 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on education, representing 14.7 percent of total government expenditures (Edstats). This represents a 1 This report presents country data collected in 2014 using the incorporated into the background and context sections at the SABER-EPS policy intent data collection instrument. It thus request of the government, following the data collection offers a specific snapshot in time. Additional data was exercise. SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 5 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Table 1. Primary Completion Rate by Income Quintile and Location Difference Primary completion rate 2000 2010 (%) Wealthiest quintile 76.9 97.7 20.8 Poorest quintile 39.9 42.1 2.2 Difference 37.0 55.6 Urban 79.7 79.0 -0.7 Rural 49.6 64.7 15.1 Difference 30.1 14.3 Male 55.0 70.0 3.1 Female 51.8 63.4 6.6 Difference 3.2 6.6 Source: Edstats.. Recent data on the distribution of educational spending shows that Malawi has the most inequitable distribution of educational resources of any country in Africa (World Bank 2010). In the average African country, 43 percent of all educational spending goes to the most educated 10 percent. In Malawi, roughly 74 percent of all spending goes to the most educated 10 percent (Ibid.). The wealthiest one-fifth of students in the country benefit from 68 percent of public resources for education. Student performance on national achievement exams indicates a substantial need for better quality in primary education. In 2007, Malawi was the lowest-performing country in reading and the second lowest in math among the 15 countries whose students took the SACMEQ (Southern and Eastern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality) III exam. Malawi’s grade 6 students performed 0.8 standard deviations below the mean score in reading and 0.6 standard deviations below the mean score in math. Only 27 percent of students reached the upper levels of reading competency in the country, compared with an average of 64 percent across all SACMEQ countries. In math, only 8 percent of Malawian students reached the upper levels of competency, compared with 37 percent in all SACMEQ III countries (SACMEQ 2010). SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 6 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Private Education in Malawi Table 2. Distribution of Schools and Students by Ownership Type The distinction between government and religious Government Independent Religious schools in Malawi is somewhat opaque. The majority of Primary faith-based schools are owned by the Church of Central Schools 39% 3% 58% Africa, Presbyterian (CCAP) or the Catholic Church. These Students 37% 1% 62% schools are organized under an umbrella organization Pupil-teacher ratio 73:1 28:1 77:1 known as the Association of Christian Educators (ACEM). Until 1920, these schools were funded completely by Secondary missions. Until independence in 1964, they were the Schools 69% 16% 15% major providers of education in Malawi (Kadzamira and Students 70% 15% 15% Kunje 2002). After independence, the government Pupil-teacher ratio 22:1 24:1 21:1 assumed control of all religious schools. Thus since 1964, Source: MEST (2012). the government has officially maintained principal control over most of these schools, and since 1994, In general, there is still much that is not known about the provided the funding for these schools (Kadzamira et al. performance of the non-state education sector in Malawi. To date, empirical research on non-government 2004). In recent years ACEM schools have sought to schools in the country remains sparse. Data from the increase their control over school decision making, but regional SACMEQ III exam show similar performance the government maintains principal control, given its between grade 6 students in government and non- role in funding the schools. As such, although these government schools in both reading and mathematics schools are owned by faith-based organizations, they (table 3). Students at non-government schools score operate under funding, management, and regulation slightly higher than those from government schools; mechanisms similar to those of government schools, however, these results are cursory and do not account such as those governing student enrollment; teacher recruitment, deployment, and payment; supervision and for any systematic differences in student characteristics inspection; and provision of instructional materials (table 3). (Kadzamira et al. 2004). Table 3. Achievement of Grade Six Students in Overall, faith-based and/or religious organizations Malawi’s government and non-government schools Government Non-Gov’t operate 58 percent of primary schools and other private organizations, 3 percent (table 2). Secondary education Mathematics 444.4 453.8 in the country is provided primarily by government (Std. Err.) (1.44) (2.22) providers (69 percent). The remainder of secondary Reading 431.0 437.6 education provision is split between religious and (Std. Err.) (1.17) (1.84) independent private providers. Table 2 also shows that, Source: SACMEQ (2010). at the primary level, pupil-teacher ratios are more than Data from Malawi’s 2006 Primary School-Leaving 2.5 times higher in government and religious schools Examination show high pass rates in independent private than in independent private schools. Pupil-teacher ratios schools (82 percent), and similar, but lower, pass rates in at the secondary level are roughly equal. At the primary both government (75 percent) and religious (73 percent) level, the average independent private school has 194 schools (World Bank 2010). These results are robust, students, compared to over 600 in the average public controlling for factors such as school location, classroom and religious school (World Bank 2010). organization, school conditions, and teacher characteristics (Ibid.). Yet these comparisons do not account for any differences in student characteristics. More rigorous evidence is thus needed to assess the true differences in student performance among schools. Malawi’s Private Education Policies The constitution of Malawi provides the legal foundation for private schools to operate, so long as they (i) are registered with the government and (ii) do not provide SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 7 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 an inferior standard of education than that provided by the public school system. Many of Malawi’s current education policies are outlined in the Education Act of 1962, which was enacted before the country achieved independence. Needless to say, the act needs to be revised in order to adequately address the current needs of the school system. Unfortunately, a revised act has been under discussion for over a decade (Kadzamira et al. 2004) and a more current piece of legislation still awaits enactment. A number of Malawi’s key policy documents recognize the potential role of the private sector in improving access to and the quality of education services. As the Education Sector Implementation Plan 2009–2013 states, the Malawi education system “belongs to everyone” and “reinvigorating it will take the combined efforts of the Government, private sector, development partners, civil society and parents/guardians” (MEST 2009). The Malawi National Examinations Board (MANEB) is responsible for developing, administering, and processing national examinations in the country. All public and private school students studying the primary and secondary curriculum take the MANEB examinations. Some independent private schools follow an alternative curriculum and administer international examinations. The main policies, laws, and official documentation used to benchmark the education system in Malawi include:  Education Act of 1962  Policy and Investment Framework (2000)  Education Sector Implementation Plan 2009– 2013  Malawi Growth and Development Strategy II 2011–2016  National Education Sector Plan 2008–2017 SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 8 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Benchmarking Malawi’s Private School Development level: Policies Independent private schools: Government-funded private schools: This section of the report presents the results of the SABER-Engaging the Private Sector analysis of laws, In Malawi, education policies allow for a high degree of policies, and regulations governing independent private school-level autonomy in both independent and and government-funded private schools, as Malawi has government-funded private schools. With an overall decided to involve these providers in offering education score of established, current policies meet the standards services. The report discusses the benchmarking results of good practice. These policies enable private schools to against established recommended practices. For more make their own decisions on the appointment, information on the global evidence underlying these deployment, and dismissal of teachers; teacher salary policy goals, see the SABER framework paper, “What levels; and class size standards (table 3). In addition, Matters Most for Engaging the Private Sector in government-funded private schools have autonomy over Education” (Baum et al. 2014). their operating budgets. (Control over budgets is not measured for independent private schools, as they are Goal 1: Encouraging Innovation by Providers assumed to have such autonomy.) The highly particular and contextualized nature of There are two restrictions on private schools in Malawi. education delivery necessitates decision making at the First, schools are not allowed to set their own teacher school level. In order to be aware of and adapt to standards, and second, the central government changing student needs, school leaders require determines how the curriculum should be delivered. autonomy over the most critical managerial decisions. Table 3. Goal 1. Encouraging Innovation by Providers The methodologically rigorous studies assessing the A. Common policies: Independent private schools and impacts of local school autonomy on student learning government-funded private schools outcomes generally find a positive relationship (Hanushek and Woessmann 2010; Bruns, Filmer and Item Score Justification Patrinos 2011). A few studies find evidence that local Central government has autonomy for school leaders is associated with increased Who has legal authority Latent legal authority to set to set teacher student achievement, as well as reduced student  minimum standards for standards? repetition and failure rates (King and Özler 2005; Jimenez teachers. and Sawada 2003; Gertler, Patrinos, and Rubio-Codina The school has the legal 2012). Who has legal authority Advanced authority to appoint to appoint and deploy  teachers without teachers? government review. Box 2. International Best Practice – Encouraging Innovation by Providers The school has the legal The following decisions/processes are made at the school Who has legal authority Advanced authority to determine level: to determine teacher teacher salary levels   Establishment of teacher qualification standards. salary levels? without government  Appointment and deployment of teachers review.  Teacher salary levels  Teacher dismissals The school has the legal Who has legal authority Advanced authority to dismiss  The way in which the curriculum is delivered to dismiss teachers?  teachers without  Class-size decisions government review.  Management of the operating budgets Central government has Who has legal authority Latent the legal authority over to determine how the  how the curriculum is curriculum is delivered? delivered. SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 9 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 A. Common policies: Independent private schools and Box 3. International Best Practice – Holding Schools government-funded private schools Accountable The school has the legal  The central government sets standards regarding Who has legal authority Advanced what students need to learn, including deadlines authority to determine to determine maximum for meeting these standards.  class sizes without class size? government review.  Students are required to take standardized examinations; exam results are disaggregated by B. Policies for government-funded private schools school, socioeconomic status, gender, etc.  Schools are required to report on the use of public Item Score Justification funds as a condition of continued funding.  The central government or an external agency Who has legal authority The school has the legal performs school inspections as determined by over the management Advanced authority over the school need. of school operating  management of school  Schools produce school improvement plans. budgets? operating budgets.  School performance is tied to sanctions and/or rewards. Based on the benchmarking results for Encouraging Innovation by Providers, the suggested policy options for Development level: Malawi include: Private independent schools:  Allow both independent and government-funded Government-funded private schools: private schools to set teacher standards at the school level and tailor the curriculum to meet the Malawi’s policies for holding both independent and needs of the local community, once capacity within government-funded private schools accountable both types of schools meets a minimum quality demonstrate systematic instances of good practice, with standard that is monitored and verified in a clear a score of established on the benchmarking procedure. regulatory environment. Policies pertaining to standardized exams and school inspections demonstrate good practice. Goal 2: Holding Schools Accountable The Malawi National Education Examinations Board On average, students perform better in schools with (MANEB was created by an Act of Parliament in 1987 and higher levels of accountability to the state today serves the following functions: (Abdulkadiroglu et al. 2011; Carnoy and Loeb 2002;  Conducts academic, technical, and other Woessmann et al. 2007; Hanushek and Raymond 2005). examinations at the conclusion of any approved For non-state providers, when government funding is course, as considered desirable in the public tied to accountability standards, schools are incentivized interest to perform more efficiently (Barrera-Osorio and Raju  Accurately processes and analyzes examination 2010; Patrinos 2002). A strong accountability system results requires that the government, parents, and educational professionals work together to raise outcomes. The  Awards certificates and diplomas to successful government must play a role in ensuring that superior candidates in such examinations education quality is delivered by schools. SABER-EPS  Devises, develops, and implements systems of assesses multiple policy indicators to determine non- tests to facilitate the proper selection of pupils state provider accountability. A list of the key indicators /students for secondary, university, and other is provided in box 3. tertiary institutions  Formulates policies on educational assessment  Organizes training courses for examiners, markers, supervisors, invigilators, and item writers so as to ensure proper management of examinations and tests conducted by the Board Specifically, MANEB is responsible for administering the three school-level examinations: the Primary School- SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 10 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Leaving Certificate of Education (PSLCE), the Junior Table 4. Types of School Inspection in Malawi Certificate of Education (JCE), and the Malawi School Type of Duration of Certificate of Education (MSCE). Inspection Objectives Who does it visit Full Evaluation of all Team of Full day MANEB is now working with the Malawi Ministry of inspectors: inspection aspects of the Education, Science, and Technology to create a forum school: curriculum, 3–6 that will analyze the Chief Examiners’ reports and organization of inspectors provide feedback to subject teachers and schools. Till teaching and depending now, these reports have not been used adequately to learning, general on size of inform improvements in classroom teaching and testing. school school administration, The inspection framework covers private independent documentation, schools, religious schools, and public schools. Schools are provisions of inspected once every two years. In addition, Malawi has buildings and inspections based on need, using the following criteria grounds, for targeted schools: equipment. a) Schools with poor examination results b) Schools which are poorly managed Follow-up Evaluation of 1–2 advisors 2 hours inspection extent to which c) Schools which have not been inspected for more recommendations than two years made in full d) High-performing schools in order to learn the inspection report good practices have been implemented. Malawi also has four different types of school inspection (table 4). The inspection report includes information on Partial Examination and 1–2 advisors Depends on the type of school visited, enrollment, staffing, ratings of inspection evaluation of one gravity of various aspects of school performance, as well as a listing or a limited the of strengths and weaknesses. number of aspects aspect(s) of school life. being After the inspection school staff members and the head inspected teacher are briefed on the findings. This discussion gives Block Improving 6–8 1–2 weeks the staff and head teacher a chance to start working on inspection inspection supervisors the weaknesses identified in the school. coverage of from schools over a different specific period of districts time. School reports are sent to individual schools, district education offices (for primary schools), divisional offices (for secondary schools), education authority of a religious education agency (for religious schools), and to the proprietors (for private schools). Schools are required to submit an action plan to the district education office (for primary schools) and the divisional office (for secondary schools). However, no specific unit is responsible for following up on these reports, although each department in the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (MEST) follows up on the area that is within their own remit. There are no sanctions for underperformance. Additionally, SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 11 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 government-funded private schools are not required to A. Common policies: Independent private schools and report on the use of public funds for continued financial government-funded private schools support (table 5). Are sanctions There are no administered based Latent sanctions in place on the results of  Table 5. Goal 2: Holding Schools Accountable for school inspections or A. Common policies: Independent private schools and underperformance. performance on government-funded private schools standardized exams? Item Score Justification B. Policies for government-funded private schools Does government set Government sets Are schools required Government does Established to report to the not require schools standards on what standards on what  government on the Latent to report on the use students need to learn students need to and by when? learn and by when. use of public funds as  of public funds as a a condition of condition of Standardized exams continued funding? continued funding. Established are administered *It is worth noting that while Malawi received an advanced annually in select  ranking in this category, according to the evidence-based SABER grades, but policy EPS Framework and the review of existing laws and policies Are students required does not require available at the time of data collection, country discussions have to take standardized disaggregation of indicated that is important to include the number of inspected exams, with results results. Data are schools during a certain period. That data can offer further disaggregated? accessible for insights into this item and a more nuanced discussion of this analysis based on a particular issue. reasonable set of student and school- level attributes. Informed by the results of the benchmarking procedure, the following suggested policy options help Malawi Government increase the accountability of private schools: Advanced Are school inspections requires schools to performed as  undergo needs- determined by school based inspections  Ensure that one agency is responsible for need? based on previous monitoring school action plans. The agency performance.* should have functional lower-level structures to enable regular outreach to schools, permitting Inspection reports it to follow up on the existence, resourcing, and Established include strengths and weaknesses of implementation of school action plans.  the school, plus  Establish standards for disaggregating specific priorities standardized exam results by key for improvement. characteristics, such as type of school, Following the inspection, schools socioeconomic background, gender, and other are required to types of disadvantage. Does the inspection submit a school  Establish appropriate sanctions for private report outline the improvement plan strengths and schools’ underperformance on standardized to the district or weaknesses of the divisional office. exams and/or school inspections. school? However, there is  Require government-funded schools to report little follow-up on on the use of public funds as a condition of the action plan, as continued funding. no MEST department is responsible for Goal 3: Empowering all Parents, Students, and monitoring its Communities implementation. Empowering parents, students, and communities is one of the foundations for creating quality learning opportunities for all students. Poor and marginalized children, together with youth, disproportionately lack SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 12 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 access to quality education services. To overcome this the Ministry of Education, which in turn seeks final obstacle, governments need to increase providers’ approval from the presidency before official release. accountability to all clients, particularly underserved These results are published in the media through a press groups. Educational access and the performance of release. For all three school examinations, MANEB schools and students can be substantially impacted by produces and distributes a pass/fail list to all schools. For openly disseminating comparable school performance selection examinations, such as those at the primary information (Andrabi, Das, and Khwaja 2009; Pandey, level, the Ministry of Education conducts its own Goyal, and Sundararaman 2009; Björkman 2007; selection process and publishes a selection list made Reinikka and Svensson 2005); increasing parental available to all districts and selected schools, where influence in the school (Skoufias and Shapiro 2006; King students can access the results. and Özler 2005; Jimenez and Sawada 1999; Gertler, Parents and student participate in the inspection process Patrinos, and Rubio-Codina 2012; Di Gropello and by taking part in focus groups as follows: Marshall 2005); and implementing demand-side a) Parents through their governing bodies, such as interventions, such as scholarships, vouchers, or cash transfers, to help the most vulnerable students (Orazem the Parents Teachers Associations and School and King 2007; Filmer and Schady 2008; Lewis and Management Committees, participate in focus Lockheed 2007; Patrinos 2002; Barrera-Osorio 2006). group discussions on issues pertaining to school Effective policy practices for non-state providers include improvement using the SWOT (strengths, some of the indicators listed in box 4. weaknesses, opportunities, threats) process. b) Students are involved in focus group discussions Box 4. International Best Practice—Empowering All regarding issues that they feel would improve Parents, Students, and Communities their school.  Information on standardized tests and school inspections is made available by multiple sources. Focus group discussions are used to triangulate the  Parents and students are included in the findings with classroom visits and assessment results. inspection and improvement-planning processes.  Admission processes for entry into publicly funded The government does not provide tax relief or cash schools are not based on student background; a transfers to students who attend independent private lottery is used in cases of oversubscription. schools. Government-funded private schools are allowed  School choice is not hindered by mandatory to set admission criteria, which may restrict the ability of financial contributions. students to access high-quality schooling regardless of  Tax subsidies, scholarships, or cash transfers are their background. A household’s choice of school is also available to families whose children attend hindered by these schools’ compulsory financial independent private schools. contributions. Development level: Private independent schools: Government-funded private schools: In Malawi, the policies toward independent private schools to empower parents, students, and communities are emerging, that is, they exemplify some good practice, but additional policies could increase the client power of parents and allow them to hold providers accountable for results. For government-funded private schools, policies for empowering parents, students, and communities are latent (table 6). For both independent and government-funded private schools, standardized examination results are approved by the Board of Directors of MANEB, and submitted to SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 13 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Table 6. Goal 3: Empowering all Parents, Students, and  Restrict student selection by academic ability and Communities geography in government-funded private schools in A. Common policies: Independent private schools and order to ensure equal opportunity for all students. government-funded private schools  Offer targeted cash transfers to low-income families for their children to attend private schools. Item Score Justification Examinations results are Goal 4: Promoting Diversity of Supply released to schools, but Are standardized exam there is no policy which By opening education to a more diverse set of providers, Emerging results and inspection guarantee parents governments can increase client power and make reports provided  access to these results regularly to parents? or to inspection reports providers directly accountable to students and parents on the school as a for results. Although the public sector will always remain whole. an important (and, in most cases, the predominant) provider of education services, educational choice can be Are parents and Students and parents used as part of a package of reforms to improve students interviewed Advanced focus groups form part as part of the  of the inspection education access and quality in both the public and inspection process? process. private sectors (Hoxby 2003; Levin and Belfield 2003; De la Croix and Doepke 2009; Carnoy and McEwan 2003; B. Policies for independent private schools Himmler 2007; Angrist et al. 2002; World Bank 2003). In order to facilitate quality improvements through Does the government The government does increased school competition and choice, governments provide tax subsidies not provide tax relief or can (i) allow multiple types of providers to operate; or cash transfers for Latent cash transfers for families whose (ii) promote clear, open, affordable, and unrestrictive  students who attend children attend certification standards; and (iii) make government independent private independent private funding (and other incentives) available to non-state schools. schools? schools. This policy goal aims to increase the ability of C. Policies for government-funded private schools diverse providers to provide education services. In order to do so, a number of policy indicators are suggested, as Are schools allowed to outlined in box 5. Schools are allowed to apply selective Latent select students based on admission criteria academic performance Box 5. International Best Practice—Promoting when admitting  and geography. Diversity of Supply students?  The central government allows different types of providers to operate schools. Are schools allowed to charge additional fees Latent Compulsory  Certification standards do not prohibit market or accept contributions restrict entry.  contributions from parental choice.  Information on market-entry requirements is parents? available from multiple sources.  Regulatory fees do not prohibit market entry.  Publicly funded non state schools and public Informed by the results of the benchmarking procedure schools receive equivalent student funding; for Malawi, the following suggested policy options are funding is increased to meet specific student intended to help empower parents and students to needs. influence the quality of education services provided by  The central government provides incentives for private schools: market entry, such as access to start-up funding,  Guarantee parents access to comparable public land, and public buildings. information on the quality of schools, such as  Schools are able to plan budgets six months in standardized exam results and school inspection advance of the academic year. reports disaggregated by important characteristics,  Privately managed schools are not restricted by such as type of school, socioeconomic background, student numbers, school numbers, or location. gender, and other types of disadvantage. This goal  The central government does not restrict tuition levels at private independent schools. could be accomplished through school report cards. SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 14 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Development level: Private independent schools: Government-funded private schools: In Malawi, the policies in place to promote diversity of supply for independent private schools are established—representing systematic good practice. For government-funded private schools, these policies are emerging—representing some instances of good practice. Overall, government policy supports entry and relatively unburdened operation of multiple private education providers into the market. Schools are free to set their own tuition fees. All types of providers (community, not- for-profit, for-profit, and faith-based) are allowed to operate private schools. Private and public schools are subject to equivalent operating standards. Schools are able to operate without paying operating fees to the government. The government does not, however, make clear regulatory guidelines available in order for new schools to become registered. In government-funded private schools, academic and additional budgets are equivalent to those of public schools. However, these schools do not receive targeted funding to meet individual student needs (e.g., students from marginalized groups or who have special educational needs). Government-funded private schools also do not receive start-up funding, nor do they receive information on funding amounts and timelines for delivery of this funding. SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 15 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Table 7. Goal 4: Promoting Diversity of Supply For government-funded private schools: A. Policies for independent private schools  Outline the funding amounts schools will receive in a Item Score Justification timely manner. Who has legal Schools are free to  If the government seeks to support additional Advanced government-funded private schools, take initial costs authority to determine determine their own  tuition fee standards? tuition fees. of opening a school into consideration. The government  Consider increasing funding for marginalized groups. Does the government allows community, allow multiple types of Advanced not-for-profit, faith- providers to operate a  based, and for-profit school? providers to operate schools. Are operating Private and public standards less Established schools are subject stringent for private to equivalent than for public  operating standards. schools? Are there guidelines clearly publicized by Registration multiple sources Latent guidelines are not outlining the  officially outlined. requirements for school registration? Are schools able to Schools are able to Advanced operate without operate without  paying fees? paying fees. B. Policies for government-funded private schools Does the government Academic and provide equivalent additional budgets funding of budgets for Established are equivalent to per public and  student amounts in government-funded public schools. private schools? Do government- Government-funded funded private schools Emerging private schools do receive any start-up  not receive any start- funding? up funding. Is information on the Policies do not amount of require government Latent to provide government funding  provided in a timely information on manner? funding. Informed by the results of the benchmarking procedure for Malawi, the following suggested policy options are intended to help better promote diversity of supply for independent private schools:  Publish clear registration guidelines to encourage new schools to enter the market. SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 16 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 From Analysis to Action: Policy goals, and the practical actionable steps needed to be taken by each individual within the school. Research has Options for Malawi shown that improvement plans can be successful when Malawi has nearly achieved universal primary they clearly define goals; pursue simple actions with enrollment, with a net enrollment rate of 89 percent. consistency; align standards, curriculum, instruction, and However, primary schools have large class sizes and assessment; and create a culture of achievement access to secondary education has remained stagnant. (Schmoker and Marzano 1999, Reeves 2006; Collins The quality of learning outcomes also requires 2005). Changes at the school level, however, will only improvement. Based on the results of the benchmarking occur when relationships in the school are also exercise, this report offers three suggested policy strengthened. School leaders must ensure that options to strengthen the government’s engagement improvement plans are meaningful to all stakeholders with both independent private schools and government- and purposeful actions are taken throughout a school funded private schools in order to ensure learning for all: (Fullan 2007). Incentives at the school level can also help strengthen buy-in and raise accountability. For non-state 1. Concentrate on improving the quality of providers, when government funding is tied to learning outcomes at the school level through accountability standards (e.g., via vouchers or subsidies), improvement planning and the use of it creates an incentive for schools to perform more incentives. efficiently (Patrinos 2002). 2. Empower parents by ensuring that they receive Country examples information on school quality that enables them to make informed choices, and are not hindered Western Cape, South Africa requires schools to submit by restrictive school selection criteria. individual school improvement plans. Particular attention is given to those schools that did not achieve 3. Create a regulatory environment that the required pass rate on the state examinations. The encourages greater supply of school places to number of underperforming schools has declined every help overcome supply constraints, particularly year, from 85 in 2009 to 26 in 2012 (Western Cape at the secondary level. Government 2013). Western Cape is also cited in a study that reviewed how the most improved schools continue These policy options are supported by international to improve (Mourshed, Chijoke, and Barber 2010). evidence, best practice, and examples of countries that have used innovative interventions to improve their In Brazil, the Ministry’s Plano de Desenvolvimento da education systems from a variety of starting points. Escola (PDE) project required schools to identify their Policy Option 1: Concentrate on improving the most serious problems and develop their own school quality of learning outcomes through school improvement plans. The PDE also required schools to focus their plans on two or three Effectiveness Factors improvement planning and incentives. (EF), one of which must be effective teaching and Current education policies in Malawi outline student learning; the other EFs are chosen from a list of general standards, facilitate an assessment framework (including areas detailed in the PDE manual. Students in PDE standardized exams), and mandate inspections. schools saw greater increases in grade passing rates than However, there are limited incentives and support students in non-PDE schools (Carnoy et al. 2008). structures to ensure that schools improve. Inspection frameworks should outline strengths and weaknesses of In Pakistan, Punjab Education Foundation’s Assisted schools, with the school system then supporting Schools (FAS) program provides monthly per-student priorities for improvement. Improvement planning can cash subsidies and free textbooks to low-cost private facilitate positive change as a school strives to deliver schools. The program grew exponentially from 8,573 better educational outcomes for all students. School students and 54 schools in 2005 to over 1 million improvement plans have been an important part of students and 3,000 schools in 2012. Participation in the multiple successful education programs in developing program requires that schools achieve a minimum countries (Bruns, Filmer, and Patrinos 2011). student pass rate in a semi-annual multi-subject exam – Improvement plans traditionally outline the goals that a Quality Assurance Test (QAT). At least two-thirds of school desires to achieve, the strategies to achieve those tested students must score above 40 percent on the SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 17 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 QAT. If a school fails to achieve the minimum pass rate Policy Option 2: Empower parents by ensuring on two consecutive QATs, it is permanently disqualified that they are: 1) given information on school for funding. quality that enables them to make informed choices and 2) not hindered by restrictive school A rigorous evaluation of the program found a positive selection criteria. causal impact of the threat of program expulsion on student learning. Schools threatened with losing access Based on current policies, the government of Malawi to subsidies were nearly always successful in raising could increase the information provided to parents on student scores to meet the minimum pass rate on school quality. Central governments ought not to be the subsequent exams; where only 49 percent of schools in only monitors of school performance. Access to the study met the minimum pass rate in November of comparative school information would enable parents 2007, nearly 100 percent of these same schools met it in and students to influence school quality through March of 2008. The program also offers two cash bonus increased choice and direct voice to providers. This benefits. The first is a teacher bonus for a high level of information could include school report cards, classroom school test performance: once every academic year, a assessment results, examination results, and/or maximum of five teachers, in each program school where inspection reports. Evidence from Pakistan found that at least 90 percent of students in tested classes obtain a school report cards improved learning by 0.1 standard score of 40 percent or higher in the QAT, receive an deviations and reduced fees by almost 20 percent. The award of 10,000 rupees (US$118) each. The second is a largest learning gains (0.34 standard deviations) were for competitive school bonus for top school test initially low-performing (below median baseline test performance: once every academic year, the program scores) private schools, with the worst of these more school in each of the seven main program districts which likely to close (Andrabi, Das, and Khawja 2009). has the highest share of students with a score of 40% or Government-funded private schools higher in the QAT is awarded 50,000 rupees (US$ 588) (Barrera-Osorio and Raju 2010). The ability of parents to use information on school quality is also hindered by selective admissions practices. Government-funded private schools Schools are currently free to select students based on Government-funded private schools need to strengthen academic ability and location. Malawi needs to focus not their accountability for use of public funds. This need is only on making information available to parents, but also highlighted as a priority in the National Education Sector on ensuring that students, regardless of background, Plan, particularly at the secondary level, where lack of have access to good-quality schooling. financial prudence, poor management and insufficient Country examples information systems currently compromise standards (MEST 2008). Greater transparency and more rigorous An early adopter of school report cards was Parana state compliance would improve the efficiency with which in Brazil. Between 1999 and 2002 report cards were these providers use government funding. introduced to inform school communities and stimulate greater involvement in the school improvement process. Country examples The report cards were disseminated to a wider range of In Uganda, a survey in 1991 showed that only 13 percent stakeholders including all schools, PTAs, municipal of funds were reaching schools. This led the Government education authorities and all 70,000 state education of Uganda to disseminate information on monthly employees including 46,000 teachers. Overall results transfers to the districts via newspapers and radio. were reported in the state education secretariat’s Schools were also required to show use of the intended monthly newsletter, used in teacher and PTA workshops, funds per student. By 1999, around 90 percent of funding and disseminated via press releases and press had reached schools and was being used to support conferences (EQUIP2). student learning (Reinikka and Svensson 2005). In the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua, a USAID-funded program – Civic Engagement for Education Reform in Central America (CERCA) – implemented a school report card that focused on indicators in four areas: SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 18 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Country example 1. Context: basic profile information (number of In the UK, the government clearly outlines the guidelines students in each grade, etc.) and access to services for setting up a new publicly funded, privately managed at the school (sanitation, electricity, etc.) school, Free School. A Separate NGO, the New Schools 2. Inputs: class size, access to resources (notebooks, Network, was also established to provide advice and pens, etc.), and access to social services (school guidance on how to successfully set up a new free school meals, health programs, etc.) (Department for Education, UK 2013). 3. Processes: student and teacher attendance, school plan implementation, and parent participation In the Malawi context, current restrictions on teacher 4. Results: coverage and efficiency (repetition and standards and curriculum could be eased to encourage retention) more diverse suppliers to enter the market. The results of the school report card are used by Country example communities to develop and monitor implementation of In Burkina Faso, a public-private partnership was set up school action plans (CERCA 2006). in order to increase enrollment in lower secondary schools from 20 percent in 2004 to a projected 33.5 In Andhra Pradesh, India, the Vidya Chaitanyam percent by 2009. Under the partnership, the government intervention used citizens to monitor and advocate for supported the construction and equipment of 80 private higher quality service delivery from government and schools and hired and paid for two teachers per school. non-government basic education providers. This was The schools aimed to reduce disparities in the choice of intended to strengthen the oversight function in the secondary schools in the provinces. The 18 provinces state due to the lack of capacity at the Local Education with the lowest coverage benefitted from 70 percent of Offices whose responsibility is to carry out school program funding. These schools then operated at a lower inspections. The program included members of cost than typical private schools. No recurrent costs were Women’s Self Help Groups, who were often illiterate and incurred by the government.2 semi-literate, to assess the quality of basic education provision through the use of school scorecards. The Government- funded private schools results of the scorecards were shared with district Ensure that information on funding amount is given to officials, the local School Management Committee and at schools in a timely manner to facilitate planning at the local women’s Self Help Group meetings (CFBT 2013). school level. Policy Option 3: Create a regulatory environment that encourages greater supply of school places to help overcome supply constraints, particularly at the secondary level. In Malawi, pupil-teacher ratios are well above the African average — over 70:1. Expansion of the private education sector is hampered by a lack of transparency regarding official guidelines on how new schools can become registered. 2 World Bank, n.d., “Burkino Faso: Projects & Operations,” webpage accessed November 15, 2013. World Bank, Washington, DC. SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 19 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Education: A Framework Paper.” SABER Working Paper 8. Acknowledgments SABER, Education Global Practice, World Bank, This SABER-EPS Country Report was originally prepared Washington, DC. by Donald Baum and Laura Lewis at World Bank Björkman, M. 2007. “Does Money Matter for Student headquarters in Washington, D.C. Updates to the report Performance? Evidence from a Grant Program in Uganda.” IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for were led by Minju Choi and Oni Lusk-Stover, in Economic Research) Working Paper 326, Bocconi consultation with the World Bank Education team for University, Italy. Malawi, to reflect the latest available data in the Bruns, B., D. Filmer, and H. A. Patrinos. 2011. Making Schools background sections. The original data was collected by Work: New Evidence on Accountability Reforms. Dick Maganga, based in Lilongwe. The report presents Washington DC: World Bank. country data collected in 2014 using the SABER-EPS Carnoy, M., A. K. Gove, S. Loeb, J. H. Marshall, and M. Socias. policy intent data collection instrument. It thus offers a 2008. “How Schools and Students Respond to School specific snapshot in time. The report was prepared in Improvement Programs: The Case of Brazil's consultation with the government of Malawi and the PDE.” Economics of Education Review 27 (1): 22–38. World Bank Education Malawi team. Carnoy, M., and S. Loeb. 2002. "Does External Accountability Affect Student Outcomes? A Cross-State Analysis." The SABER-EPS team would like to thank the U.K. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 24 (4):305– Department for International Development for its 331. support of the Education Markets for the Poor research Carnoy, M., and P. J. McEwan. 2003. “Does Privatization study, which made this work possible. Improve Education? The Case of Chile’s National Voucher Plan.” In Choosing Choice: School Choice in International References Perspective, ed. D. N. Plank and G. Sykes, 24–44. New York: Teachers College Press. CERCA (Civic Engagement Abdulkadiroğlu, A., J. D. Angrist, S. M. Dynarski, T. J. Kane, and for Education Reform in Central America). 2006. “School P. A. Pathak. 2011. “Accountability and Flexibility in Report Card.” Academy for Educational Development, Public Schools: Evidence from Boston's Charters and Washington, DC. Pilots.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 126(2): 699– CfBT Education Trust. 2013. “Community-Based Accountability 748. for School Improvement: A Case Study from Rural India.” Andrabi, T., J. Das, and A. Khwaja. 2009. “Report Cards: The CfBT Education Trust, Reading, UK. Impact of Providing School and Child Test Scores on Collins, J. C. 2005. Good to Great and the Social Sectors: A Educational Markets.” Unpublished manuscript. World Monograph to Accompany Good to Great. New York: Bank, Washington, DC. Harper Collins. Angrist, J., E. Bettinger, E. Bloom, and E. King. 2002. “Vouchers De la Croix, D., and M. Doepke. 2009. “To Segregate or to for Private Schooling in Colombia: Evidence from a Integrate: Education Politics and Democracy.” The Randomized Natural Experiment.” American Economic Review of Economic Studies 76 (2): 597–628. Review 92 (5): 1535–58. Di Gropello, E., and J. H. Marshall. 2005. “Teacher Effort and Barrera-Osorio, F. 2006. “The Impact of Private Provision of Schooling Outcomes in Rural Honduras.” In Incentives to Public Education: Empirical Evidence from Bogotá’s Improve Teaching, ed. E. Vegas, 307–57. Washington, DC: Concession Schools.” World Bank Policy Research World Bank. Working Paper 4121. Education Unit, Human Development Network, World Bank, Washington, DC. EdStats (database). World Bank, Washington, DC. www.worldbank.org/education/edstats. Barrera-Osorio, F., and D. Raju. 2010. "Short-Run Learning Dynamics under a Test-Based Accountability System: EQUIP 2. 2013. “Increasing Accountability in Education in Evidence from Pakistan." World Bank Policy Research Paraná State, Brazil.” Policy Brief. EQUIP 2, Washington, Working Paper 5465. Education Unit, South Asia Region, DC. and Education Unit, Human Development Network, http://www.epdc.org/sites/default/files/documents/ World Bank, Washington, DC. Increasing%20Accountability%20in%20Parana%20State %20Brazil.pdf. Barro, R. J., and J-W. Lee. 2013. “A New Data Set of Educational Attainment in the World, 1950–2010.” Journal of Filmer, D., and N. Schady. 2008. “Getting Girls into School: Development Economics 104: 184–98. Evidence from a Scholarship Program in Cambodia.” Economic Development and Cultural Change Baum, D., L. Lewis, O. Lusk-Stover, and H. A. Patrinos. 2014. 56 (3): 581–617. “What Matters Most for Engaging the Private Sector in SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 20 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 French, R., and G. Kingdon. 2010. “The Relative Effectiveness Lewis, M., and M. Lockheed. 2007. Exclusion, Gender, and of Private Government Schools in Rural India: Evidence Education: Case Studies from the Developing World. from ASER Data.” Department of Quantitative Social Washington, DC: Center for Global Development. Science Working Paper 10-03. Institute of Education, Malawi, Government of. MESC (Ministry of Education, Sports, University of London, UK. and Culture). 2000. “Malawi Education Sector: Policy and Fullan, M. 2007. The New Meaning of Educational Change . 4th Investment Framework (PIF).” MESC, Lilongwe, Malawi. ed. New York: Teachers College Press and Abingdon, UK: ———. MEST (Ministry of Education, Science, and Routledge. Technology). 2008. “National Education Sector Plan Gertler, P., H. A. Patrinos, and M. Rubio-Codina. 2012. 2008–17.” MEST, Lilongwe, Malawi. “Empowering Parents to Improve Education: Evidence ———. 2009. “Education Sector Implementation Plan 2009– from Rural Mexico.” Journal of Development Economics 2013.” MEST, Lilongwe, Malawi. 99 (1): 68–79. ———. 2012. “Education Statistics 2012.” Department of Hanushek, E. A., and M. E. Raymond. 2005. "Does School Education Planning, MEST, Lilongwe, Malawi. Accountability lead to Improved Student Performance?" ———. NSO (National Statistical Office). 2014. “Integrated Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 24 (2):297– Household Panel Survey, 2010–2013: Household Socio- 327. Economic Characteristics Report.” NSO, Lilongwe, Hanushek, E. A., and L. Woessmann. 2013. “Does School Malawi. Autonomy Make Sense Everywhere? Panel Estimates McEwan, P. J. (Eds.). 2002. Cost-effectiveness and educational from PISA.” Journal of Development Economics 104 policy. Yearbook of the American Education Finance (September): 212–32. Association. New York: Routledge. Himmler, O. 2007. “The Effects of School Choice on Academic Mourshed, M., C. Chijioke, and M. Barber. 2010. “How the Achievement in the Netherlands.” Georg-August- Most Improved School Systems Keep Getting Better.” Universität, Göttingen, Germany. McKinsey & Company, London, UK. Hossain, N. 2007. “Expanding Access to Education in Orazem, P. F., and E. M. King. 2007. “Schooling in Developing Bangladesh.” In Ending Poverty in South Asia: Ideas that Countries: The Roles of Supply, Demand, and Work, ed. D. Narayan and E. Glinskaya, 304–25. Government Policy.” Handbook of Development Washington, DC: World Bank. Economics 4: 3475–3559. Hoxby, C. M. 2003. “School Choice and School Competition: Pal, S., and G. G. Kingdon. 2010. “Can Private School Growth Evidence from the United States.” Swedish Economic Foster Universal Literacy? Panel Evidence from Indian Policy Review 10: 9–65. Districts.” Discussion Paper 5274. Institute of the Study of Jimenez, E., and Y. Sawada. 1999. “Do Community-Managed Labor (Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit), Bonn, Schools Work? An Evaluation of El Salvador’s EDUCO Germany. Program.” World Bank Economic Review 13 (3): 415–41. Pandey, P., S. Goyal, and V. Sundararaman. 2009. “Community ———. 2003. “Does Community Management Help Keep Kids Participation in Public Schools: Impact of Information in Schools? Evidence Using Panel Data from El Salvador's Campaigns in Three Indian States.” Education Economics EDUCO Program.” CIRJE (Center for International 17 (3): 355–75. Research on the Japanese Economy) Discussion Paper F- Patrinos, H. A. 2002. “A Review of Demand-Side Financing 236. CIRJE, University of Tokyo, Japan. Initiatives in Education.” Unpublished draft. World Bank, Kadzamira, E., and D. Kunje. 2002. “The Changing Roles of Non- Washington, DC. Governmental Organizations in Education in Malawi.” ———, ed. 2012. “SABER: Strengthening the Quality of Center for Educational Research and Training, University Education in East Asia.” Education Unit, Human of Malawi, Zomba, Malawi. Development Network, World Bank, Washington, DC. Kadzamira, E., D. Moran, J. Mulligan, N. Ndirenda, K. Nthara, B. Patrinos, H. A., F. Barrera-Osorio, and J. Guáqueta. 2009. The Reed, and P. Rose. 2004. “Non-State Providers of Basic Role and Impact of Public-Private Partnerships in Services in Malawi—Notes.” Department for Education. Washington, DC: World Bank. International Development, London, UK. Reeves, D. B. 2006. “The Learning Leader: How to Focus School King, E. M., and B. Özler. 2005. “What’s Decentralization Got Improvement for Better Results.” Association of to Do with Learning? School Autonomy and Student Curriculum & Development, Alexandria, VA. Performance.” Discussion Paper 54/ 21COE. Interfaces for Advanced Economic Analysis, Kyoto University, Japan. Reinikka, R., and J. Svensson. 2005. “Fighting Corruption to Improve Schooling: Evidence from a Newspaper Levin, H. M., and C. R. Belfield. 2003. “The Marketplace in Campaign in Uganda.” Journal of the European Economic Education.” Review of Research in Education 27: 183– Association 3 (2–3): 259–67. 219. SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 21 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 Republic of Malawi. 2012. Second Malawi Growth and Development Strategy (MGDS II) 2011-2016. SACMEQ (Southern and Eastern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality). 2010. “What Are the Levels and Trends in Reading and Mathematics Achievement?” SACMEQ Policy Issue 2. SACMEQ, Gaborone, Botswana. Schmoker, M., and R. J. Marzano. 1999. “Realizing the Promise of Standards-Based Education.” Educational Leadership 56: 17–21. Skoufias, E., and J. Shapiro. 2006. “The Pitfalls of Evaluating a School Grants Program Using Non-Experimental Data.” Policy Research Working Paper 4036. World Bank, Washington, DC. United Kingdom, Government of. Department for Education. 2013. “Opening a Free School or Studio School.” Department of Education, Manchester, UK. http://www.education.gov.uk/a0075656/freeschools- faqs-curriculum#faq3. Western Cape, Government of. 2013. “Plan to Address the Needs of our Underperforming Schools.” Press Release, March 24, 2013. Government of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa. Woessmann, L., E. Ludemann, G. Schutz, and M. R. West. 2007. “School Accountability, Autonomy, Choice, and the Level of Student Achievement: International Evidence from PISA 2003.” Education Working Paper 13. OECD, Paris. World Bank. 2003. World Development Report 2004: Making Services Work for Poor People. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2009. Abolishing School Fees in Africa: Lessons from Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, and Mozambique. Washington, DC: World Bank and UNICEF. ———. 2010. “The Education System in Malawi: Country Status Report.” World Bank Working Paper 182. Education Unit, Human Development Network, World Bank. ———. 2011. “Education Strategy 2020: Learning for All: Investing in People’s Knowledge and Skills to Promote Development.” World Bank, Washington, DC. ———. 2013. “What Matters for Workforce Development: A Framework and Tool for Analysis.” SABER Working Paper Series 6. Education Unit, Human Development Network, World Bank, Washington, DC. World Development Indicators (database). World Bank, Washington, DC. http://databank.worldbank.org/data/reports.aspx?sour ce=world-development-indicators SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 22 MALAWI ǀ ENGAGING THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN EDUCATION SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2015 www.worldbank.org/education/saber The Systems Approach for Better Education Results (SABER) initiative collects data on the policies and institutions of education systems around the world and benchmarks them against practices associated with student learning. SABER aims to give all parties with a stake in educational results—from students, administrators, teachers, and parents to policymakers and business people—an accessible, detailed, objective snapshot of how well the policies of their country's education system are oriented toward ensuring that all children and youth learn. This report focuses specifically on policies of engaging the private sector in education. This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 23