In light of the achievements made by the Ministry of Education (MOE) in collaboration with the RAMP project, which encompassed various aspects of early education, such as enhancing literacy skills, refining supervision and teaching methods for reading and math, implementing effective learning assessments, and developing supportive educational materials, the MOE sought to integrate these gains into a comprehensive roadmap to further enhance literacy skills and align with the objectives of the national strategy for human resource development. The Ministry of Education is committed to creating a coherent vision aimed at significantly elevating Arabic literacy standards for students in KG2 to Grade 6. This vision is manifested in an evidence-based literacy reform strategy owned by Jordan and slated for implementation over a five-year period. Given the complexity of this endeavor, collaboration among multiple interconnected national teams was essential. To that end, the MOE established a National Task Force, chaired by the Minister of Education and comprised of influential figures from the public and private sectors who could bring this visionary literacy reform strategy to fruition in Jordan. The development of this comprehensive National Literacy Strategy was led by the Ministry of Education, with support from USAID, UKAID, and other national partners. This strategy built upon the achievements of the RAMP project, expanded upon them, and ensured ongoing progress in enhancing Arabic reading skills, extending its reach to include students in higher grades. The National Literacy Strategy (NLS) is a visionary initiative designed to achieve several crucial objectives: 1. Identify National Priorities: It pinpoints key national priorities and programs aimed at enhancing Jordan's literacy outcomes. 2. Leverage Existing Strengths: The NLS builds upon the assets and strengths already in place, particularly those established by RAMP, to maximize its impact. 3. Provide a Clear Roadmap: It offers a practical, evidence-informed implementation roadmap, ensuring that its objectives are met effectively. 4. Long-Term Commitment: The NLS commands widespread support over a 5-year implementation period, emphasizing its dedication to sustainable progress. 5. Unite Stakeholders: It aligns all actors in the education space toward a common goal and coordinates external financing and technical support from partners in the public, private, and community sectors. Over a span of two years from 2020 to 2022, the NLS Technical Committee embarked on an extensive journey. during which they meticulously: • Analyzed the current literacy status at different learning stages in Jordan, officially acknowledging the challenge of low student literacy performance. • Agreed upon the NLS vision and strategic goals, identifying the factors in homes, communities, and schools influencing literacy learning. • Scrutinized the various elements within the education system affecting literacy learning, assessing their strengths and weaknesses. • Identified educational policy priorities and programs essential for improving literacy and contributing to the NLS's vision and objectives. • Developed a results framework, outlining strategic objectives, specific program objectives, short and long-term activities, risk analyses, and challenges. In the final stretch of 2022, RAMP completed the first draft of the strategy document, seeking input from the National Literacy Strategy Taskforce and key partners such as USAID, FCDO, World Bank, UNICEF, and the Higher Family Council. Their valuable comments were integrated to refine the strategy further. With RAMP's technical assistance, the NLS Technical Committee devised a 5-year NLS plan and a 1-year implementation plan, guided by the Minister of Education's directions during a pivotal Task Force meeting in December 2022. Workshops and interviews were conducted to gather data and budget information. Fast forward to May 5, 2023, a momentous day for Jordan's education landscape. The NLS Implementation and Monitoring Plan received approval from the Task Force, led by H.E. Minister of Education, Dr. Azmi Mahafzah, with the esteemed presence of USAID. The Minister endorsed the plan, indicating that the MOE would seek approval from the MoE educational board and establish a dedicated committee or secretariat to manage the NLS plan's implementation. Jordan's launch of its first five-year National Literacy Strategy is a moment of pride and hope. This strategy marks a transformative step towards fostering a generation of passionate readers, improving literacy, and promoting reading as an enjoyable habit. It's not just a milestone for Jordan but also sets an inspiring model for literacy improvement across the Middle East. Jordan's National Literacy Strategy is not just a plan; it's a beacon of hope, a promise of a brighter future, and a testament to the power of collaboration and dedication in the pursuit of educational excellence.

The Reading and Mathematics Initiatives (RAMP), in close collaboration and coordination with the Ministry of Education (MOE), have developed a comprehensive sustainability plan. This plan was created through active engagement with MOE Directorates and extensive consultations with stakeholders, both within the initiative and the Ministry of Education. It outlines a detailed strategy for each of the four key areas: Curricula, Professional Development/Training, Support and Supervision, and Assessment. Additionally, it includes several overarching recommendations critical to achieving sustainability and enhancing educational outcomes. The plan contains two levels: Level 1 focuses on defining the specific elements of new concepts or activities introduced under RAMP; Level 2 focuses on ensuring that these concepts or activities are seamlessly integrated throughout the system, ensuring that each department understands its role and responsibility for implementation. Structure of the Sustainability Plan Level One: This level addresses the essential procedures and plans required to seamlessly integrate the methodologies and projects initiated by RAMP into the Ministry's educational framework. It focuses on both current and future methodologies and projects, ensuring their alignment with the phases of the educational process. Specific, measurable objectives have been established, and they are applied within predefined timelines to enhance and consolidate concepts, methods, tools, and information technology currently utilized by the Ministry of Education. For instance, the MOE has effectively sustained and improved the e-supervision system, a crucial tool for identifying underperforming schools and devising coaching plans to bolster their performance. This system has led to substantial enhancements in data collection, evidence-based decision-making, as well as monitoring and accountability systems. Level Two: At this level, procedures and plans are outlined to identify high-level recommendations aimed at fostering coherence, consistency, data flow, and accountability within the Ministry of Education. These recommendations are designed to enhance key procedures related to early-grade education in reading and mathematics, extending to ensure coordination among various MOE directorates and other stakeholders. It's important to note that the recommendations at this level are not limited to RAMP methodologies; they encompass all aspects of the Ministry's systems, procedures, and methodologies. For example, the MOE has established a committee comprising education experts from different MOE directorates. This committee collaboratively works to ensure coherence and consistency in early-grade education practices across diverse MOE directorates. Together, they have standardized the following elements mentioned in the sustainability plan related to early grades: 1. Student performance indicators have become essential components of the Education Strategic Plan (ESP). Simultaneously, the National Center for Curriculum Development (NCCD) has successfully incorporated RAMP's reading and mathematics instructional approaches into the newly developed curriculum framework and learning materials designed for early grades. 2. The Examination and Testing Directorate has played a vital role in institutionalizing the Early Grades National Assessment Framework, which includes the biannual Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) and Early Grade Mathematics Assessment (EGMA), annual surveys based on the Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LQAS) methodology, and the implementation of a class-level diagnostic assessment system with accompanying tools. Standard operating procedures were meticulously designed to ensure consistency and effectiveness in this process. 3. The Education and Training Center (ETC) has accredited the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Program specifically tailored for Kindergarten (KG) and early grades teachers. The RAMP Sustainability Plan transcends mere documentation – it serves as a guiding compass steering the MOE towards sustained excellence in early-grade strategies and approaches within the broader education framework, system, and policies."

In 2021, Jordan’s Ministry of Education (MOE) is committed to modernizing education assessment and enhancing learning outcomes. The Early Grades Reading and Mathematics Initiative (RAMP) played a crucial role in conceptualizing the early grade assessment framework. The MOE recognized the need for a more effective and cohesive assessment system. it highlights the issues of misalignment and lack of coordination between national and international assessments, resulting in an inability to accurately measure student performance across different grades. It emphasizes the need for a comprehensive assessment system and policies to ensure consistency and monitor the quality of education in MOE's schools. As part of the RAMP sustainability plan, a comprehensive framework for early-grade assessment was developed to incorporate the latest trends in student learning assessment and enhance educational outcomes. The Directorate of Tests, in collaboration with RAMP experts, conducted an analysis of the current early-grade assessment system, identifying areas requiring improvement. A joint Ministry and RAMP team, in consultation with international evaluation experts from the RTI organization, created the framework and provided recommendations to address existing gaps. Subsequently, this framework was shared with MOE's technical departments and the National Curriculum Development Center for final approval. The Early Grades Assessment Framework has significantly benefited the MOE at both the central and field levels, including schools and field districts, by: 1. Defining and communicating clear learning expectations at all levels, including learning standards and indicators. 2. Preventing excessive evaluation practices. 3. Offering capacity-building programs for supervisors and teachers related to formative and summative assessments. 4. Utilizing assessment data to enhance student learning and promote inclusive teaching and learning for all children. 5. Formulating regulations and procedural guidelines for national assessments in early grades, thereby ensuring their sustainability and securing financial resources for implementation. The MOE introduced a structured assessment process, incorporating the Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA/EGMA) and the Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LQAS) methodology to gauge students' foundational knowledge and skills. This approach helped identify areas where students needed additional support. Extending foundational learning assessment to the classroom level allowed for tailored support to students in need, fostering inclusivity. The revamped assessment approach brought about positive changes. LQAS results informed support strategies for districts, individual schools, and teachers. Classroom-level assessments allowed differentiated support to students. The Ministry of Education's (MOE) commitment to aligning the assessment framework with expected learning outcomes has yielded positive results and has paved the way for further improvements in Jordan's education system. As evidence of this commitment, the results of the EGRA/EGMA end-line survey conducted in May 2023 demonstrate significant improvements in the reading and mathematics skills of Grade 2 (G2) and Grade 3 (G3) students compared to 2019 and 2021. For example, G2 students in traditional MoE schools have shown remarkable progress, with their reading proficiency increasing from 10.7% in 2021 to 42.4%, while G3 students improved from 39.4% to 60.3%. The MOE's unwavering commitment to aligning assessment with learning outcomes has yielded tangible, positive results. As Jordan continues its journey towards educational excellence, the comprehensive assessment framework for early grades stands as a testament to the dedication and innovation of the MOE and its partners. By placing learning outcomes at the forefront, Jordan is not just shaping a brighter future for its students but also setting a remarkable example for education systems worldwide. Stay tuned for more updates as Jordan's education transformation unfolds. The future looks promising, indeed.

An integral part of a decentralized education system hierarchy is the “middle tier” comprising subnational actors in charge of education delivery at the regional, provincial, state, district, municipality, city, or circuit and cluster levels. The general roles and responsibilities of the middle tier are described in research on district leadership in OECD countries. Their responsibilities range from planning, monitoring, and implementing reforms at the subnational and school levels, to ensuring school-based accountability through data and evidence, to innovating, supporting, and monitoring improvements in teaching and learning in schools through instructional leadership and fostering professional learning communities at the district and school levels. While rigorous academic evidence may be lacking on the ability of middle managers to bring about improvements in foundational literacy and learning outcomes at scale in LMICs, we have theoretical and programmatic evidence on (1) their role in instructional leadership, (2) the importance of building their capacity to drive teaching and learning, and (3) the importance of trust and support within the education system that fosters learning at scale. Thumbnail Credit: Pakistan Reading Program/IRC

Implementing mother-tongue based education in a multilingual context like the Philippines requires a full appreciation of the many languages spoken across communities and schools and among students and their teachers. DepEd’s Learner Information System which assigns a language to students when they are registered fails to capture a true picture of the languages students speak, primarily because it relies on the teacher to select the language assigned to each student. For example, in Region V, most teachers simply assign “Bikol” to their students. The USAID-funded ABC+ project deployed a computerized language identification tool in region V and VI to more accurately assess students and teachers individually and thus identify the primary and secondary languages that they speak.

Wanting to support effective learning in the early grades of school in a linguistically diverse country such as the Philippines it is important answer some basic questions, such as: • What languages do children come to school speaking? • Do children have more than one language that they can use when they start school? • What languages do teachers speak? • And how well do students’ and teachers’ languages match? Data from different sources is used to answers these questions.

Traditional projects in education introduce innovations at the school level, sometimes improving learning in a defined number of schools. The hope is that somehow piloted successes can be replicated or taken to scale. But too often they are not. Dissatisfied with this, donors may choose policy-level interventions that promote resource reallocations, specific policy reforms, and investments in administrative and management capacity to effect system-wide change. But the record of policy reforms having impact on learning at the school level is disappointing. If we fund school-level projects, the challenge lies in how to create policy and institutional reforms that support replicable school-level success. If we support policy-level interventions, the challenge lies in how to ensure that national reforms lead to changes in the day-to-day practice of schools. Both approaches require effective programs of what we call reform support. Why is reform support needed? Ten years ago USAID published the Education Reform Support (ERS) series to answer just this question. ERS recognizes that the existing arrangements in the education sector—urban-rural inequities, management environments skewed by bureaucratic concerns, teaching improvements constrained by union prerogatives—are not accidental. Powerful political forces benefit from, shape, and defend the current situation. Changes within the system cannot realistically be implemented without first dealing with the preexisting institutional environment. Altering that environment means recognizing who stands to win or lose from pro-posed reforms, and what incentives signal them to either work for change or defend the status quo. The literature supporting such an understanding of education reform is rich. ERS draws on that literature and goes one step further to outline the tools and techniques for sup-porting and strategically managing the reform process.

A key component of educational change is that it is often overlooks is that it is fundamentally an emotional process for teachers (Rogers, 2003). When change in instructional practice is expected of teachers, their response is usually varied; mostly determined by their environment (e.g., school, social network, etc.) and personality characteristics (Kahneman, 2011). An education system provides different inputs during this educational change with the hope that teachers can implement new instructional practices effectively. This input might include ongoing teacher support and accountability mechanisms. To better understand how teachers respond to educational change, we conducted research in coordination with Early Grade Reading programs in Tanzania and Nepal. The study used an explanatory mixed-methods approach to explore the variability of teacher response to education change, and how the education system mechanisms influenced this change. A key component of the research framework was an alignment of behavioral science and systems thinking, presenting a novel lens to uncover perspectives not usually researched. It was concluded that some teachers were able to apply a rational approach to change aligned with Guskey’s model of teacher change (1986), while other teachers implemented the new early grade reading curriculum while retaining key aspects of their prior default pedagogical approach. The accountability and support system focused on teacher compliance for curriculum delivery, the most observable and correctable aspect of classroom instruction. For teachers in schools with low student achievement and gain, Finally, most teachers were unaware of the actual performance levels of their students, believing that most or all of their students would meet systems expectations of reading proficiency by the end of grade two. Leveraging theoretical perspectives from Fullan (2015), Rogers (2003), and Kahneman (2011), this study concludes with recommendations of the most promising avenue of research regarding how to address educational systems change.

The purpose of this formal group panel presentation is to hold an in-depth discussion on USAID’s investments into system strengthening across Asia over the past decade and how these efforts are situated within the broader global move to focus more intentionally and coherently on education system strengthening. The panel will discuss a 2022 empirical research study (the USAID System Strengthening Review, hereafter “the Review”) conducted by two international research organizations for the USAID Asia Bureau which reviews USAID system strengthening work in 11 Asian countries. This Review offers a qualitative evidence-based analysis relevant to the field of comparative and international education (CIE) and analyzes new data collected from a desk review of relevant project documents, reports, and evaluations, key informant interviews, multi-stakeholder survey, and three deep-dive case studies in Nepal, Cambodia, and the Philippines. The group panel will include three presentations on different aspects of the Review and include discussant commentary and critique to elicit group and audience discussion. The first panel presentation discusses a theoretical framework drawn from the RISE Programme (Pritchett 2015 and Spivak 2021) and recent analysis from the Brookings Institution’s Center for Universal Education. The Review’s central research questions are guided by these broader global trends, as well as its own analysis framework developed specifically for this study, discussed in Presentation 3. Conclusions are drawn based on this framework, and the overall discussion in Presentations 2 and 3 considers the context of USAID programming in Asia and how new knowledge provides new insights.

The method used is a historical analysis of the route through which education in Japan and South Korea was framed, and then implemented, in the period starting in 1870 (approximately) in the former and 1945 (approximately but especially after the Korean war) or so in the latter. We analyze both policy intention as in various laws, decrees, and policies, as well as implementation. Debates around equality, the interpretation of Western ideas as filtered by each country’s history, are covered. Original policy documents are analyzed as well as literature on the educational history of both countries, including educational and pedagogical issues. Long-term historical statistics and cliometrics are also employed mostly to compare context and results, rather than methods. South Korea and Japan are chosen because they are, today, high performers both in terms of average achievement and, even more importantly, equality, who went about their reforms with clear intentionality and purpose, and where there were distinct historical pivots that can be pinned to a specific decade or even a single pivotal year. Other high-achieving countries in the West more or less evolved into their systems. Even countries that are often cited as examples for the lower-income countries to emulate, such as Finland, did not set about fundamental reforms with the clear purpose and intentionality that South Korea and Japan did. Side references are made to other cases where intentionality was key, and where there was a clear purpose and bureaucratic organizational effort, such as Prussia. Similar insights are raised through an analysis of speeches and writings of pan-African independence leaders in the 1960s regarding the centrality of education to the nation-building project. Emerging themes that could be of interest to lower-income countries today include: a) the focus on education as fundamental to national purpose, not just as an abstract commitment to numerical goals such as the MDGs and SDGs (without denying the utility of such goals), b) an intense focus on education as a way of redressing class (as in “education should not just be for the samurai class”) and colonization issues (as in “education is key to help us resist undue economic and military power from the West”) from the past, and hence a focus on equality, c) an intense questioning of what could be learned from the West rather than just acceptance and simple borrowing, and d) a relentless focus on bureaucratic efficiency, planning, and investment discipline in terms of not expanding higher levels until lower levels are universalized (for the sake of equality and quality). The focus is largely narrative and qualitative, but historical statistics are used to document the results obtained, such as the very high degree of equality and also efficiency achieved (in fact, signaling how efficiency and equality may have been helpful to each other), whereby even low-income segments of the population benefit from quality education. The contexts, not just the results, are analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively.