-
Paper co-authors: Allison Anderson, Center for Universal
Education, Brookings Institution, Fellow: [email protected]
Kate Anderson Simons, Policy Analyst and Technical Lead, Learning
Metrics Task Force, Center for Universal Education, Brookings
Institution: [email protected]
Toward Universal Learning: Defining Global Ambition on Learning
Post-2015
Abstract: To define global ambition on improving learning and
inform the post-2015 global development policy discourse, the
Center for Universal Education (CUE) at the Brookings Institution
and the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) co-convened the
Learning Metrics Task Force in mid-2012. This 18-month-long project
aims to harness the collective expertise of the global education
community in order to identify common learning goals and targets.
The task force draws on the input of technical working groups and
public consultation to make its recommendations. The first report
of the LMTF, "Toward Universal Learning: What Every Child Should
Learn" was released in February 2013 and described a broad
framework for learning, encompassing seven domains and beginning in
early childhood and extending through the transition to work and
life. The domains go beyond literacy and numeracy to include
domains such as social and emotional, physical well-being, and
culture and the arts. The second report, Toward Universal Learning:
A Global Framework for Measuring Learning, describes how learning
can be measured in these domains at the national, regional, and
global levels. The third report, scheduled for release in November
2013, will focus on how various actors can implement these
recommendations to improve learning levels around the world. This
presentation will highlight the LMTF findings and reflect upon the
issues and debates surrounding global learning goals, especially as
related to the post-2015 development framework.
mailto:[email protected]://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2013/02/learning-metricshttp://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2013/02/learning-metricshttp://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2013/07/global-framework-measuring-learning
-
Sub-theme Title: Futures of Development Assistance
UKFIET International Conference on Education and Development
Education & Development Post 2015: Reflecting, Reviewing,
Re-visioning. Oxford, 10 12 September
2013
-
Toward Universal Learning: Defining Global Ambition on Learning
Post-2015
Over the past fifteen years, thanks in large part to the second
Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of universal primary education,
major advances have been made in enrolling millions of children
worldwide.i However, despite significant progress in getting more
girls and boys into school, those gains have been uneven, and
learning levels remain unacceptably low. Too often children leave
both primary and secondary levels without acquiring the basic
knowledge, skills, and competencies they need to lead productive,
healthy lives and to attain sustainable livelihoods. In addition,
economic, gender and ethnic disparities, and factors such as
conflict and disability, still prevent millions of girls and boys
from even attending school.
There is a global learning crisis, which is hitting the poorest,
most marginalized children and youth particularly hard. According
to estimates in the 2012 EFA Global Monitoring Report:ii
Approximately 120 million children either never make it to
school or drop out before their fourth year;
In 123 low and middle income countries almost 200 million youth
have not completed primary education, 58% of these are female;
and
At least 250 million primary-school-age children around the
world are not able to read, write or count well enough to meet
minimum learning standards, including girls and boys who have spent
at least four years in school.
Worse still, we may not know the full extent of the learning
crisis as these figures are likely to be a gross underestimate,
given that many countries do not measure basic reading or
arithmetic in primary grades.iii
Data show that learning levels not necessarily years in school
are what drive many social and economic returns on investments in
education.iv Empirical studies provide robust evidence that it is
the acquisition of knowledge and skills (cognitive and behavioral),
rather than schooling, that promotes employability, productivity,
and growth. For a major part of the worlds population, however,
education systems fall far short of these expectations. Poor
quality education are jeopardizing the future of millions of young
people across high-, medium- and low-income countries alike.v In
shaping education for the future, efforts to expand enrollment,
retention and completion at all levels must be accompanied by
policies to enhance educational quality and measure learning
outcomes in order to improve quality.vi vii
-
With a new set of global development goals on the post-2015
horizon, what can the education community do now to catalyze a
shift in global focus and investment from universal access to
ensuring access plus improving learning opportunities and outcomes
worldwide?
The Learning Metrics Task Force
To help answer this question, UNESCO, through its Institute for
Statistics (UIS), and the Center for Universal Education (CUE) at
the Brookings Institution have joined efforts to convene the
Learning Metrics Task Force (LMTF) to identify common learning
goals to improve learning opportunities and outcomes for children
and youth worldwide. Through a group of high-level task force
members, three technical working groups, and an open global
consultation process, the LMTF has received input and expertise
from more than 1,600 individuals in at least 100 countries to date.
Approximately 50 percent of the task force and working group
members and nearly 75 percent of participants in the public
consultations are from organizations and agencies in the Global
South.
The task forcecomprised of representatives of national and
regional governments, EFA-convening agencies, regional political
bodies, civil society organizations, and donor agenciesis engaged
in an 18-month process to build consensus around three essential
questions addressed in the following order:
Standards (Phase I): What learning is important globally?
Methods & Measures (Phase II): How should it be measured?
Implementation (Phase III): How can measurement of learning
improve
education quality and learning outcomes?
The task forces 18-month-long process of research, global
consultation and consensus-building on learning measurement with
education stakeholders around the world aims to not only develop
concrete, actionable recommendations to help countries, regional
and international organizations measure learning outcomes at
national and global levels, but also to translate those
recommendations into action through the organizations and networks
of the task force members and partners. Beyond project end, the
goal is to ensure that learning is a focus of all education
discussions and that the education community uses measurement and
global advocacy to improve learning outcomes and opportunities for
all children and youth.
http://www.brookings.edu/about/centers/universal-education/learning-metrics-task-force
-
As originally conceived, the job of the Learning Metrics Task
Force is to build consensus around global aspiration for learning
and the measurement of learning outcomes. The task force recognizes
that this is only one small piece of the larger quality puzzle,
albeit an important one. Assessments alone will not improve the
quality of instruction or learning environments; rather, they
provide a better understanding of outcomes to enable policymakers
and educators to develop strategies for improving learning, while
taking into account many other factors.
Phase I
Phase I of the project sought to identify the learning end-goal
by answering the question: What do all children and youth need to
learn in order to succeed in the 21st century?
Given the diversity of structures, places, and times at which
children and youth learn, it is a challenge to define what outcomes
related to learning are important, especially at a global level.
Furthermore, to develop a framework that would be relevant for the
next 15 years, the task force recognized that it would have to take
a step back from what is measurable today and consider first what
learning is important for the 21st century. Considering
recommendations from a working group of experts, the task force
decided that there are important competencies that all children and
youth should master no matter where they live in the world.
Moreover, feedback from interviews with key stakeholders and global
consultations pointed to a growing demand globally for measuring
learning in multiple areas, not just literacy and numeracy.
Accordingly, the task force set forth a broad, holistic definition
of learning that encompasses seven domains, with various
competencies in each, as important for all children and youth to
develop55.viii The seven domains are:
Physical well-being (subdomain examples: physical health and
hygiene, food and nutrition, physical activity)
Social and emotional (subdomain examples: social and community
values, civic values, mental health and well-being)
Culture and the arts (subdomain examples: creative arts,
cultural knowledge, self- and community identify, awareness of and
respect for diversity)
Literacy and communication (subdomain examples: speaking and
listening, vocabulary, writing, reading)
-
Learning approaches and cognition (subdomain examples:
persistence and attention, cooperation, problem solving,
self-direction, critical thinking)
Numeracy and mathematics (subdomain examples: number concepts
and operations, geometry and patterns, mathematics application,
data and statistics)
Science and technology (subdomain examples: scientific inquiry,
life science, physical science, earth science, awareness and use of
digital technology)
This holistic framework of learning domains was developed by
drawing on existing global policies and dialogues, such as EFA and
the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child; research supporting
the importance of learning in these domains for human development,
economic growth and prosperity; and results from global public
consultation, in which more than 500 individuals in 57 countries
provided feedback. The overwhelming majority of participants in the
global consultation, especially those from the Global South, argued
for a broad definition of learning that goes beyond basic literacy
and numeracy.6
Phase II
After establishing what children should learn, Phase II of the
project investigated the question: How will we know whether
learning is occurring under each of the seven domains? More
specifically: How can we measure and track progress in learning at
the global and national levels? The Measures and Methods Working
Group of 57 experts in education and assessment worked to provide
technical guidance to help the task force address this
question.
Box 1. Key Debates
Working group and task force members engaged in vigorous debates
during Phase II, a few of which are highlighted below along the
decisions that ultimately emerged.
Scope of Measurement and Unintended Consequences: In formulating
its recommendations, the task force faced the challenge of striking
a delicate balance: how to communicate the importance of all seven
learning domains presented in the Phase I framework, while also
identifying just a small set of measures for tracking at the global
level. Some members worried that pulling out just a few domains for
global measurement might signal to policymakers and education
systems that the other domains are less important. This
http://www.brookings.edu/about/centers/universal-education/learning-metrics-task-force/working-groupshttp://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2013/02/18-universal-learning-winthrop
-
might in turn have the unintended consequence of limiting
diversity in national curricula or driving donor funding toward
narrow learning goals. In the end, the task force agreed that it
was necessary to identify a small number of measures for tracking
at the global level and selected six specific areas of measurement.
To guard against unintended consequences, the task force proposed a
new global measure that would track the breadth of learning
opportunities young people received; namely, are children and youth
being given the opportunity to learn across all seven learning
domains? The task force also emphasized the need to operationalize
the global areas of measurement while simultaneously helping to
build measurement capacity at the national level.
International Comparability and Statistical Rigor: Assessments
such as PIRLS, TIMSS and PISA are regarded as the gold standard for
internationally comparable learning assessment. However, a country
can spend up to $250,000 to participate, plus the costs to
administer the tests, which can be substantially more. On the other
hand, some national assessments have high levels of statistical
rigor and provide information that is often more relevant to the
individual country context. Task force members finally agreed that
international comparability was important in some areas, such as
reading comprehension and mathematics, but measuring learning using
a common tool to compare progress over time, or equity in learning
outcomes, could also be useful in tracking progress toward global
goals.
Measuring Learning in School and Out of School: Some task force
members argued it is pragmatic to focus measurement efforts in
schools not only because it is economical, but also because the
primary aim of large-scale assessments is to influence education
policy and school systems. But other members were concerned that a
continued focus on measuring learning within schools would lead to
further exclusion of out-of-school children and youth. Still others
pointed out that given current trends and the proliferation of
learning technologies, learning might take place in a wider range
of contexts in the future. The task force decided that access
indicators (on enrollment and completion) should be paired closely
with learning indicators to maintain a focus on getting children
into school while also improving learning outcomes. Furthermore,
the task force promotes a broad definition of schooling that allows
for a range of intentional learning contexts (e.g., job-embedded
learning, nonformal programs, distance learning), beyond the walls
of the traditional school building.
Accounting for a Diversity of Contexts and Learning Levels: The
task force recognized that while some (mostly high and
upper-middle-income) countries participate in rigorous national and
internationally comparable assessments, others have a very limited
culture of evaluation and therefore limited information on how well
their education systems are
-
functioning. Another challenge is how to account for existing
learning levels in countries where a large proportion of learners
would score below the lowest internationally benchmarked levels.
There was general consensus among task force members that building
on internationally comparable assessments was advisable in some
contexts, but may not be a good fit for countries where vast
numbers of children are unable to read in the language of the test.
In these environments, additional tools would be necessary to
capture all learning levels.
From the seven domains of learning and the 105 corresponding
subdomains identified in Phase I, the task force and working group
identified six areas of measurement that represent important
learning opportunities for children and youth to enable them to be
effective members of a globalized society, and which are feasible
and desirable to be tracked a the global levelix: 1.) Access to and
Completion of Learning Opportunities: Children and youth must
access, and most importantly complete their education. This domain
addresses the unfinished access agenda for out-of-school children
and youth and emphasizes the importance of tracking completion,
which currently is not done systematically. It also allows for a
broad definition of schooling, including any intentional learning
programs, whether formal, non-formal or virtual. Evidence shows
that the skills and knowledge needed for global citizenship are
rarely learned outside of intentional learning activities.
2.) Exposure to a Breadth of Learning Opportunities Across all
Seven Domains: Children and youth should have a breadth of learning
opportunities that, at a minimum, covers the seven learning
domains. It is expected that an even broader set of competencies is
necessary at the national and local levels; however, the task force
recommends that the breadth of learning that education systems
offer, at least across these seven domains, be tracked
globally.
3.) Early Childhood Experiences that Result in Readiness for
Primary School: The early childhood years are critical to later
learning and development. Entry to primary school is a key
milestone in a child's learning trajectory, and measuring school
readiness can help drive improvements in preprimary education,
health, family services, etc. Because of the varying rates at which
young children develop, a holistic measure across multiple domains
is the best way to capture learning at this stage. School readiness
is broadly defined and typically includes aspects of learning
related to at least five of the seven domains: physical well-being,
social and emotional, literacy and communication, learning
approaches and cognition, and numeracy and mathematics.
-
4.) The Ability to Read and Understand a Variety of Texts:
Children and youth must be able to communicate in their mother
tongue and in the primary language of instruction. Foundational
reading skills necessary for learning to read are critical for
functioning in modern society, in addition to the ability to
comprehend and analyze complex texts through a variety of media.
This domain encompasses both primary and lower secondary
levels.
5.) The Ability to Use Numbers and Apply this Knowledge to
Real-Life Situations: Children must be able to count and understand
mathematical concepts both to make informed economic choices and to
pursue advanced learning in such disciplines as science,
engineering, economics, research, technology, etc. This domain also
encompasses both the primary and lower secondary levels.
6.) An Adaptable, Flexible Skill Set to Meet the Demands of the
21st Century: Beyond literacy and numeracy, children and youth need
a variety of skills across the seven learning domains to succeed in
the 21st century. Administered in lower secondary, this domain of
measurement might cover multiple competencies such as environmental
awareness, collaborative problem solving, information
communications technology digital literacy, and social
responsibility.
Information for these areas of measurement would be collected
using internationally comparable assessments in some cases, such as
reading comprehension and mathematics, and using alternative
assessments for others. Data collected against these areas of
measurement should describe average achievement levels in addition
to progress over time and equity across groups (girls/boys,
urban/rural and wealth levels, at a minimum).
Phase III
The third and final working group on implementation, composed of
125 members from 40 countries, convened from March through August
2013. Among others, the Implementation Working Group sought to
answer the following questions:
How governments can convene stakeholders to improve learning
measurement across the seven learning domains?
What resources and financing would be needed to implement task
force recommendations?
-
How to operationalize the two proposed areas of measurement for
which there are currently no global measures (i.e., breadth of
learning opportunities and 21st century knowledge and skills)?
The task force decided to promote a series of indicators for
global tracking of learning, some of which are feasible in the
short-term and some of which will need significant investment of
time and resources to develop. They also agreed that a process is
needed to support countries in diagnosing the quality of their
assessment systems, convening stakeholders, and accessing the
necessary technical and financial resources for improving learning
measurement and outcomes.
Global Indicators for Learning: The six areas proposed in Phase
II represent the task forces vision for how learning could be
measured globally, understanding that significant improvements in
assessment capacity would be needed in many countries before all
six areas could be measured. Tracking of additional competencies
should be determined at the national level.
The task force considered the indicators proposed by the working
group for each of the six areas of measurement. Additionally, the
task force discussed the working group recommendation to develop a
Learning for All indicator, which would combine access, completion,
and learning into one statistic. Of the indicators selected, the
task force also discussed which ones are ready for use currently
and which ones the education community could agree upon to develop
in the short, medium, and long-term. The LMTF recommends a global
process to define or refine instruments for (i) readiness to learn,
(ii) values and skills for citizens of the world, and (iii) breadth
of learning opportunities. Additional work is needed to refine
existing instruments in the areas of (i) access, (ii) completion,
(iii) a Learning for All indicator, (iv) reading, and (v) numeracy.
Country-Level Actions: The Phase III consultation revealed the need
for a framework to guide countries in implementing LMTF
recommendations. Working group members and consultation
participants identified an array of barriers and bottlenecks to
assessing learning specific to each countrys current education
system, capacity for assessment, and political economy surrounding
education and assessment. For example, some countries have national
assessment systems, some have state-developed and administered
assessments (e.g. Kenya, Nigeria, India), and other countries have
planned national assessments but have been unable to administer
them due to lack of funding, technical capacity, or political will.
Countries face a range of challenges in their political, cultural,
and educational systems that affect their ability to measure and
improve learning. For example, some countries are emerging from
conflict; others have vast gender and income
-
inequalities; and still others (e.g. small island states) have
education systems so small that large-scale assessment of learning
is not currently technically and/or financially feasible.
While the actions needed to improve measurement and learning
depend on the contextual factors in each country, consultation
feedback revealed that all countries are struggling with
measurement in some way. There is a demand from national
governments and non-governmental stakeholders to improve learning
outcomes, in part through minimizing the gap between what is
currently assessed and the countrys vision for what children and
youth should learn. The task force decided that as a next step it
would be useful to develop a diagnostic tool to help countries
assess their education measurement systems, and that existing tools
such as SABER (World Bank) and the Data Quality Assessment
Framework (IMF, adapted for use in education statistics by the UIS
and World Bank) might inform such a diagnostic. The task force
agreed to identify illustrative guiding questions that could be
used in a country or region within country to self-assess its
system of measurement so as to have an accurate starting point for
improving a range of attributes, from the specificities of an
assessment in a particular domain to the system as a whole. While
the specific details on what it means for a country to implement
LMTF recommendations remains to be determined, the task force
decided on five principles for moving forward with interested
countries, states, cities, and other parties:
1. The process should be country-driven, with a menu of options
for country-level support.
2. Implementation should be carried out in collaboration with
existing efforts by national, regional, and international
organizations. In particular, regional collaborations should be
leveraged to facilitate shared learning across the region and
ensure recommendations are implemented in a culturally relevant
way.
3. Interested countries should demonstrate commitment through
political support and cost-sharing.
4. There should be multi-stakeholder collaboration, including
through national communities of practice on assessment.
5. Any recommended products or services should be public goods,
with tools, documentation, and data made freely available.x Quality
assurance mechanisms should be in place to evaluate tools before
they are shared.
Global-Level Actions: The Measures and Methods Working Group
proposed a global mechanism, such as a multi-stakeholder advisory
group to work to fill the global data
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTEDUCATION/0,,contentMDK:23150612~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:282386,00.html
-
gap on learning in a way that both improves existing measurement
capacity and increases the ability to track progress toward global
indicators. The task force envisions three areas of worktechnical,
institutional, and politicalthat require immediate focus and might
eventually become core functions of a multi-stakeholder group. The
task force agreed that the work of this group should support and
strengthen existing actors when available and not duplicate
efforts.
Technical: Additional work is needed to develop a shared set of
tools and measures under the six areas of global measurement and
the Learning for All indicator. A multi-stakeholder group would
coordinate and keep partners accountable to the areas they have
agreed to lead and continue an inclusive and transparent
consultative process so that stakeholders remain engaged as
instruments are developed. Country-level actors should be
substantially involved in the technical work, both in the design
and development as well as at the testing stage.
Institutional: A global body should support the processes at
country and regional level for developing strong institutional
capacity to implement task force recommendations. This includes
providing feedback and guidance to countries on possible actions to
improve assessment systems, sharing information on how to access
technical expertise, guidance, and funding.
Political: To sustain the momentum and interest in measuring and
improving learning gained over the course of the LMTF project, the
multi-stakeholder group should continue to build political support
at the global and national levels. At the global level, it should
align with existing post-2015 processes and advocacy efforts,
including the UN Secretary-Generals Global Education First
Initiative (GEFI). The LMTF also has an opportunity to leverage its
growing network of more than 1,700 stakeholders who have taken part
in the task force, working groups, and consultations, and/or signed
up to receive email updates, to build a grassroots global movement
for improving learning.
Implications for the Post-2015 Agenda
The framing of education priorities as focused on access to
equitable, quality education and learning across the life-cycle has
been repeated in the three major reports of the post-2015 process
released during the spring and summer of 2013: the U.N. High-Level
Panels (HLP) report: New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and
Transform Economies through Sustainable Development; the executive
summary from the World We Want education consultation: Envisioning
Education in the Post-2015 Development Agenda; and the U.N.
Sustainable Development Solutions Networks report: An Action Agenda
for
http://www.post2015hlp.org/http://www.post2015hlp.org/http://www.post2015hlp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/UN-Report.pdfhttp://www.post2015hlp.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/UN-Report.pdfhttp://www.worldwewant2015.org/education2015http://www.worldwewant2015.org/education2015http://unsdsn.org/http://unsdsn.org/files/2013/05/130507-Action-Agenda-for-SD-Draft-for-Public-Consultation1.pdf
-
Sustainable Development (See Table).
Box 4. Proposed Post-2015 Goals for the Education Sector Report
Framing of an education goal High-Level Panel report Quality
education and lifelong learning. Executive summary from the World
We Want education consultation
Equitable, quality, lifelong education and learning for all.
Sustainable Development Solutions Network report
Effective learning for all children and youth for life and
livelihood.
In addition, when the Open Working Group on Sustainable
Development Goals met in June to discuss the issue of education,
the discussion highlighted quality, lifelong learning and the
development of vocational and transferable skills as key missing
elements from the MDGs for the post-2015 framework. For instance,
the G77 statement issued a specific call for learning outcomes:
When developing SDGs, more attention needs to be placed on relevant
and measurable learning outcomes.
This convergence of high-level post-2015 reports proposing an
education goal focused on access plus learning is an exciting
signal as to the paradigm shift from access to access plus
learning, and the work of the Learning Metrics Task Force has
certainly helped to make this paradigm shift a reality. Moreover,
the HLP report underscores the importance of both data and
measurement. Reflecting on the success and weaknesses of the MDGs,
the HLP report argues that goals without quantitative targets and
deadlines will fail to provide the motivation and accountability
necessary for progress. The education community, through the work
of the Learning Metrics Task Force, has spent the last eighteen
months tackling these same challenges in order to determine how
best to measure learning outcomes, with the ultimate goal being an
improvement of quality education for all. The LMTF work has
provided recommendations for countries at various levels of
capacity so that governments and organizations can not only track
how they are doing, but also target policy to address areas of
need. The HLP report calls for exactly this type of data across all
sectors by recommending that new goals be accompanied by an
independent and rigorous monitoring system, with regular
opportunities to report on progress and shortcomings at a high
political level.
In addition to proposing an education goal focused on quality
education and lifelong learning, the HLP report lists the following
corresponding national targets for education:
increasing the proportion of children able to access and
complete preprimary education;
http://www.worldwewant2015.org/education2015http://www.worldwewant2015.org/education2015http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?menu=1636
-
ensuring that children can read, write and count well enough to
meet minimum learning standards upon completion of primary
education;
having access to lower secondary education and increasing the
proportion of adolescents who achieve recognized and measurable
learning outcomes; and
increasing the number of young and adult women and men with the
skills, including technical and vocational, needed for work.
The challenge moving forward for the education community within
the context of the post-2015 discussions will be to debate these
targets, eventually agree to a set of targets and ultimately to
refine them into indicators. Indeed, going into the summer of 2013,
the feedback from those working on the post-2015 framework is that
education (access plus learning) is a given in the post-2015
framework; now the education community needs to focus on the
refinement of the what and focus in on the how. Once again, the
Learning Metrics Task Forces recommendations can play an important
part in this next phase of the post-2015 discussions.
While the task force has agreed that its recommendations are
bigger and broader than the post-2015 discussions (and that the
global education community should endeavor track the six areas to
fill the global data gap on learning, regardless of how education
and learning are incorporated into the next round of development
goals), its recommendations are a significant contribution to the
post-2015 discussions. Thus, as the post-2015 discussions shift to
discussion about targets and indicators for tracking, the
indicators that the task force has put forward for global tracking
of learning by 2015 (learning for all, access and completion,
reading and numeracy, as per Box 2 above) can inform the post-2015
debate and discussions. Moreover, as the task forces work to
support countries in diagnosing the quality of their assessment
systems, convening stakeholders, and accessing the necessary
technical and financial resources for improving learning
measurement and outcomes moves forward, the lessons learned from
this work will be valuable to decision-makers working on the
post-2015 agenda as well as Ministry of Education officials and
partners preparing to make the paradigm shift from access to access
plus learning within their own education systems. Learning Metrics
Task Force Next Steps The task force agreed that it should not
cease its activities in September 2013 as originally planned.
Instead, the task force will continue, releasing the LMTF
recommendations in September 2013 at the UN General Assembly in New
York City and through regional/country-level launches. The purpose
is to promote the importance of learning and build awareness of
LMTF recommendations to a wide global audience. To discuss next
steps and develop a plan for moving forward, the task force will
meet in
-
person in Washington, DC, in November 2013, in conjunction with
a World Bank meeting on assessment. As efforts focus more on
implementation, the bulk of the work will be carried out by LMTF
member organizations and other agencies that have the appropriate
expertise, capacity, and experience.
In the meantime, LMTF members, partners and the Secretariat are
working to ensure that the task force process and products are
visible and understood by decision makers involved in post-2015
discussions. Through the development and dissemination of simple
and brief policy briefs for high-level policy makers involved in
the post-2015 process, the task forces recommendations will provide
guidance for governments and negotiators as well as a road map of
targets/indicators that are technically feasible at a global level
for the post-2015 agenda and beyond.
i The Global Compact on Learning: Policy Guide, The Center for
Universal Education, The Brookings Institution, 2011. ii UNESCO.
Education for All Global Monitoring Report. UNESCO, 2012. iii
Toward Universal Learning: What Every Child Should Learn, Learning
Metrics Task Force, UNESCOs Institute for Statistics and the
Brookings Institution, 2013. iv Global Compact on Learning: Policy
Guide. v Thematic Think Piece: Education and Skills for inclusive
and sustainable development beyond 2015, UN System Task Team on
post-2015/UNESCO, 2012. See also: Beyond 2015: Education for the
Future, UNESCO Bangkok, 2012.
vi Beyond 2015: Education for the Future, UNESCO Bangkok, 2012.
vii Rebecca Winthrop, Mari Solivn and Kate Anderson Simons. The
Learning Metrics Task Force Proposes Six Domains of Measurement for
Global Tracking Post-2015, Brookings Blog, March 8, 2013.
viiiToward Universal Learning: What Every Child Should Learn,
Learning Metrics Task Force, UNESCOs Institute for Statistics and
the Brookings Institution, 2013. ix Toward Universal Learning: A
Global Framework for Measuring Learning, Learning Metrics Task
Force, UNESCOs Institute for Statistics and the Brookings
Institution, 2013. x Procedures should also be fully replicable by
independent researchers. While the data should be publicly
available, it should protect participants identities. The only
exception to this principle applies to the
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/Think%20Pieces/4_education.pdf
-
safeguarding of instruments integrity; in this case, instruments
can be kept in reserve and only exemplars be released publicly.