VII REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON EDUCATION STATISTICS 2009 - LAC Educational Information Use and Analysis for decision making Introduction and group work instructions Cancún, Quintana Roo, México, December 9, 10 and 11, 2009 REGIONAL PROJECT OF EDUCATION INDICATORS (PRIE)

Conceptual framework: Information use and analysis Data analysis: Transformation mechanism of data collected into relevant, significant and exhaustive information. Analysis for education planning and monitoring. Use and dissemination of the information: Analyse and define education information (statistics and indicators) and dissemination policies. Return information to key actors involved in the processes. Define communication strategies between information providers and political entities, to increase understanding of the issues and identify alternatives to solve them.

Context Statistics Production Development of comparable indicators Monitoring the goals Promote improvements of the countries educational systems Use and Analysis of information for decision making Evaluation of the information production process

Diagnosis: use and analysis of information Generalized lack of analytical information to evaluate the sector’s policies. The volume of the information gathered does not always translates into relevant information. Weak and limited information dissemination policies. Lack of restitution to key actors involved in the process. Difficulties in accessing a wide range of information in a timely manner, especially for planners. Need to strengthen communications between data providers and political entities A culture of evaluation is yet to create a virtuous education circle: plan->produce->evaluate->modify and planning again. Necessity to keep abreast of new information needs for management and micro-planning.

Diagnosis: use and analysis of internationally comparable education statistics reports While many international reports are available, many LAC countries have not developed a systematic national and annual mechanism that takes advantage of those international reports. In this context, it is important that statistics support policymaking, therefore they can be useful not only for international organizations and researchers, but also for education policy makers. The provision capacity of an information system is a key element that define its quality. Statisticians and planners have to constantly be aware on policy needs and recognize those as key elements to improve the information system.

Group Work Objectiv: To discuss the issues of the use of information and development of analytical reports based on education statistics and indicators developed/being developed by the Panorama for monitoring the Summit of the Americas goals Which reports are being produced at national level? Do they use internationally comparison with countries in the region? Which issues they address? Periodicity? How is the policy for disseminating information? Who are the stakeholders? How do they access them? How frequently should a national indicators report be produced: annually, every 2 years, every 5 years? What format would be most useful to national policy makers? What is/should be the institutional framework for the development of an analytical report?

Group Work The working Group sessions have the objective to learn about specific thematic related to THE USE AND ANALYSIS OF NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONALLY COMPARABLE EDUCATION INFORMATION regarding the mandates by the Heads of States and Government and documented in the Summits of the Americas declarations and action plans, as well, the outcomes from the Ministries of Education Meetings. The main purpose is to know the state of art and perspectives for future actions towards the accomplishment of their decisions and recommendations.

Group Work Group Development activities: The activities will be distributed in FOUR groups, each one discussing one specific thematic. Each group should appoint one speaker to present in the plenary session the group discussion results. Each group will have 1 h 30 min to discuss and prepare a report to be presented at the plenary session. ne computer will be available for each group to prepare to report.

GROUP Nº 1 ANALYSIS AND USE OF INFORMATION FOR DECISION-MAKING NOMBRE PAIS Adalberto Eduardo Aragundi Argentina Heriberto Igor Centellas Rojas Bolivia Ignacio Corona Venezuela Ana Paz Irene Labra Welden Chile Elisa Liliana Ojeda López Ecuador Silvia Víquez Ramírez Costa Rica Ana María Aceves Estrada México Isabel Escala Panamá Dalila Noemí Zarza Paredes Paraguay Marino Antonio Herrera República Dominicana

GROUP Nº 2 ANALYSIS AND USE OF INFORMATION FOR DECISION-MAKING NOMBRE COUNTRY Priscilla Nicholas Antigua and Barbuda Charles Andrew Major Bahamas Roderick Rudder Barbados Kendall Khodra Saint Lucia Prya Hirasingh Suriname Lenor Baptiste-Simmons Trinidad and Tobago Shalane Westby Belize Junior Alexis Grenada Evelyn Hamilton Guyana Phillipa Livingston Jamaica

GROUP Nº 3 ANALYSIS AND USE OF INFORMATION FOR DECISION-MAKING NOMBRE COUNTRY Doristeen Etinoff Antigua and Barbuda Brenda Clarace Bain Bahamas Quintin Morton Saint Kitts and Nevis Marcus Edward Saint Lucia Lisa Madray-Valadere Trinidad and Tobago Yvonne Casildo-Flowers Belize Weeferly Jules Dominica Pauleen Finlay Grenada Patricia Ann Roopnarine Guyana Barbara Allen Jamaica

GROUP Nº 4 ANALYSIS AND USE OF INFORMATION FOR DECISION-MAKING NOMBRE PAIS Marcela Alejandra Jáuregui Lassalle Argentina Erick Espejo Andrade Bolivia Juliana Marques da Silva Brasil Nora Alvardado Venezuela Ana María Baeza Arévalo Chile Eliecer Ramírez Vargas Costa Rica Felipa Yolanda Zamora Nicaragua Luis Ramón Hernández Cruz José Samaniego Panamá Alberto Estrella Contreras República Dominicana