1. 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)

2. 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.

3. 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

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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?

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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