1. 2016 Global Education Monitoring Report SDG 4 Workshop Phnom Penh November 2016
#SDG4All
@GEMreport

2. Key monitoring issues by target (with examples from Cambodia)
Purpose of the presentation
SDG 4
Indicator framework
Monitoring process
Key monitoring issues by target
(with examples from Cambodia)
Recommendations
This presentation will takes us through: the indicator framework and the monitoring process for SDG 4; some key monitoring issues by SDG 4 target with examples from Cambodia; and a set of recommendations.

3. Indicators for SDGs and SDG4: Process
There have been two parallel but linked process to develop indicators for SDG 4.
For the SDGs as a whole, the objective has been to develop a set of global indicators, approximately one indicator per target. In the case of education, therefore, there are 11 indicators. These were proposed by the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG), which contrary to what its name suggests, consists not of agencies (who are only observers) but of 28 member states. The group, which was established by the United Nations Statistical Commission (UNSC), made its proposal in March Countries will be obliged to report on these indicators – and these the backbone of the annual SDG report, whose first edition was released in July. Although the list has almost been finalized, there remain several methodological aspects to be refined and the mandate of the IAEG has been extended for that reason.
For SDG4 in particular, it is clear that 11 indicators would be too few to capture the breadth of the goal. For that reason, the international education community has requested the development of additional thematic indicators. The Technical Cooperation Group (TCG), a body consisting of the 28 IAEG member-states plus a number of agencies, is supported by UIS and has as its role to propose these indicators. These indicators are optional but provide a guiding framework.
For the purpose of this presentation, please consult the 2016 report summary, on pages (English version) / (French version), which contain the global and thematic indicators.

4. Monitoring of SDGs and SDG4: Process
Likewise there are two parallel but linked process to monitor the SDGs and SDG4 in particular.
For the SDGs as a whole, the 2030 Agenda document as well as the January 2016 report of the Secretary General envisages monitoring (or ‘follow up and review’) processes at the global, regional, national and thematic level. At the global level, the apex organization is the High-Level Political Forum, which will meet every year in July. In order to support the process, an SDG Report is being produced by the UN Department for Economic and Social Affairs, which are based on the global indicators. UNESCO and UIS are responsible for coordinating the inputs for SDG4.
However, a monitoring process just at the level of global indicators would be too superficial for the international community interested in each goal. For that reason, the January 2016 report of the Secretary General envisages also a thematic review at goal-specific level and invited inter-governmental bodies to take the initiative. In the case of education, the World Education Forum was mentioned explicitly. The last Forum in Incheon, Republic of Korea, had requested that the Global Education Monitoring Report should be the mechanism to monitor SDG4.

5. Monitoring of SDG 4: GEM Report mandate
“…request that the EFA GMR be continued as an independent GEM Report, hosted and published by UNESCO, as the mechanism for monitoring and reporting on the proposed SDG 4 and on education in the other proposed SDGs, within the mechanism to be established to monitor and review the implementation of the proposed SDGs” INCHEON DECLARATION
“…the mechanism for monitoring and reporting on SDG 4 and on education in the other SDGs… It will also report on the implementation of national and international strategies to help hold all relevant partners to account for their commitments as part of the overall SDG follow-up and review.”
FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION
The new Global Education Monitoring Report (GEM Report), which builds on the experience of the previous EFA Global Monitoring Report series, had its mandate to assess the progress of education under the new 2030 Agenda confirmed further by the Education 2030 Framework for Action.
This is the first in a 15 year series of Reports. It is clear that the new education agenda, with its greatly expanded scope, poses significant challenges to monitor and report progress on SDG 4. This presentation explores the monitoring section of the Report, which tackles these challenges with examples from Cambodia and six key recommendations.

6. Evidence Critical issues Target 4.1: Primary and secondary education
Global indicator: No data for Cambodia on percentage of those who had reached minimum level of proficiency in reading and mathematics by grade 2/3, at the end of primary and at the end of lower secondary
Thematic indicator (example): according to UIS, the percentage of those who had completed each level of education in 2014 was
- 72% in primary education
- 41% in lower secondary education
- 21% in upper secondary education
Evidence
Critical issues
The definition of ‘minimum level of proficiency’ is yet to be defined. Cambodia needs to participate in the process of deciding how these levels are to be set indirectly (through the TCG member state regional consultations)
Ensure there is a national learning assessment process in place that monitors in a consistent way over time whether (and which!) children and young people are learning what is expected: the participation in SEAPLM and PISA for Development are potentially good initial steps
For each target, selected evidence is presented separately for the global indicators (one per target) and for some of the more numerous, supplementary thematic indicators. A set of critical issues for monitoring is also discussed. Target 4.1 focuses on primary and secondary education.
The global indicator focuses on learning outcomes in reading and mathematics. There is no data for Cambodia on the share of students who reach the minimum proficiency level for early grades, at the end of primary or at the end of lower secondary education.
The international community has not yet defined what should be ‘a minimum proficiency level’ of ‘relevant and effective’ learning outcomes. Therefore, comparisons are still only possible between countries which have participated in the same assessment. A process led by the UIS has been set up to reach consensus. This should happen in an open and collaborative way, taking the priorities of countries into account and helping build robust national learning assessment systems.
It is important to build a national assessment system with quality standards so that its results monitor learning over time and across different groups of students so that they can also be used to report for the global indicator. Participation in SEA-PLM and PISA for Development are potentially good initial steps.
With respect to thematic indicators, the new agenda marks an important step forward with its emphasis on completion relative to participation. In 2014, 72% completed primary, 41% completed lower secondary and 21% completed upper secondary school according to UIS.

7. Evidence Critical issues
Target 4.2: Early childhood care and education
Global indicator 1: In Cambodia, 91% of children under 5 years of age were developmentally on track in health, 90% were on track in learning and 70% in social-emotional development in 2014.
Global indicator 2: 33% of children aged one year before the official primary entry age enrolled in pre-primary (or primary) school in 2014
Evidence
Critical issues
Establish a regular mechanism for assessing whether children reach their development potential
Monitoring of participation requires looking at the full diversity of services, including programmes outside of pre-primary education.
In Target 4.2 on early childhood, two global indicators were proposed exceptionally.
The first focuses on ensuring children begin school ‘developmentally on track’ and ‘ready for primary school’. This is a complex notion as it involves monitoring across cultures with different perceptions of child development. UNICEFs Early Childhood Development Index represents one measurement approach. However, this measure focuses strongly on early literacy and numeracy. The search for a neutral and feasible measure of early childhood development must continue both globally and in the country.
The second indicator focuses on participation: 33% of children one year younger than the official primary school entry age were enrolled in pre-primary or primary school in This way of reporting may overestimate participation because it includes children who are in primary but may not have attended pre-primary school. Moreover, more work is needed for surveys to capture the full diversity of relevant programmes outside of formal pre-primary education.

8. Evidence Recommendations
Target 4.3: TVET, tertiary and adult education
Global indicator: In Cambodia, 5% of adults had participated in formal primary education in the 12 months preceding the survey in 2014 (Placeholder indicator = percentage of adults in compulsory education)
Thematic indicator (example): in 2011, the tertiary education gross enrolment ratio was 16%
Evidence
Recommendations
Establish monitoring tools that can capture the large and growing diversity of learning programmes for this target
Costs of TVET, tertiary and adult education must also be monitored to guide government policy
Target 4.3 captures technical and vocational education and training (TVET), tertiary education – as well as adult education by virtue of the global indicator, which focuses on the percentage of adults who have participated in any kind of education during the previous year. However, currently, only Europe monitors this indicator with a survey every five years. Cambodia needs to introduce monitoring tools that capture the diversity of learning opportunities for adults. Currently, the percentage of adults in the formal education system has been proposed as a temporary replacement indicator.
Among thematic indicators, the tertiary gross enrolment ratio was 16% in 2011.
What is missing both for technical, vocational, tertiary and adult education are indicators and methods of assessing affordability, which is a key concept in the target and a core issue for policy makers.

9. Evidence Recommendations Target 4.4: Skills for work
Global indicator: No data for Cambodia on percentage of youth and adults with information and communications technology (ICT) skills by type of skill
Thematic indicator (example): 36% of adults aged 25+ years had completed at least primary education in % had at least completed lower secondary and 6% had at least completed upper secondary education in 2009.
Evidence
Recommendations
Consider how to monitor digital literacy skills and ICT skills in a way which is culturally relevant and suitable
Hold a national debate on what other skills for work need to be monitored in the country
Target 4.4 refers to skills for work. However, uncertainty around what skills can apply across economies and jobs and how they can be measured is reflected in the indicators proposed.
One indirect indicator is the percentage of the population who have attained a particular level for education. However, attainment is not a direct measure of any skill.
Outside of literacy and numeracy, covered under Target 4.6, ICT skills can be a potential candidate as they have become essential to work in diverse contexts and could be measured more systematically. However, only Europe and a handful of non- European countries provide such estimates, which are self-reported by individuals.
Digital literacy is a better marker for this target than ICT skills, as it is directly assessed and more related to the use of skills. However, monitoring of digital literacy is limited to a few rich countries so far. Monitoring globally requires keeping up with rapid technological change and keeping diverse contexts in mind – or else risk measuring a very culturally biased concept.
It is important to debate what skills the country considers important for work and think of ways to monitor them.

10. Evidence Recommendations Target 4.5: Equity
Global indicator: In Cambodia, there were 94 females for every 100 males enrolled in organized learning (one year before the official primary entry age) in (but also according to WIDE, 88% of the richest children and only 40% of the poorest children completed primary education in 2014)
Thematic indicator (example): There is no data in Cambodia on the percentage of those taught in their home language or the effectiveness of policies to address disadvantage in education.
Evidence
Recommendations
Ensure education disparities are monitored not only by gender but also by location and wealth
Try to measure other forms of disparity, by language, disability and displacement
Create a mechanism to collect and compare information about education financing policies successfully addressing disadvantages in education – and compare with similar countries
The SDG agenda requires a major shift in monitoring and reporting on inequality to ensure no one is left behind. Target 4.5 reflects concerns about equity in education.
The proposed global measure of inequality is the parity index, which has been used for a long time as a measure of gender disparity. Based on this measure, for example, we know that for every 100 males enrolled there were 94 females in organized learning (one year before the official primary entry age) in 2014.
Disparities for all education indicators can also be defined with reference to characteristics other than gender such as location and wealth. For example, in Cambodia, while 88% of the richest youth completed primary education in 2014, only 40% did so among the poorest.
More broadly, disparities are only one aspect of the target. For example, in the case of gender, beyond parity it is important to consider other aspects of gender inequality, including textbook bias or discriminatory classroom practices, for which no monitoring indicators or tools have been proposed yet.
And other dimensions of inequality deserve attention. For example, it would be important to know the percentage of children who are taught in a language they don’t speak or understand, which is a major barrier to learning - and deserves a consistent monitoring mechanism.
Finally, knowing about inequalities is powerful but not enough. A mechanism is needed for countries to exchange information about what is working in addressing disadvantage in education and learn from each other.

11. Evidence Recommendations Target 4.6: Literacy and numeracy
Global indicator: There is no data on the distribution of youth and adults by proficiency level in literacy and numeracy (but the youth literacy rate and adult literacy rate were respectively 92% and 78% in 2015)
Thematic indicator (example): There is no data on participation rates in adult literacy programmes
Evidence
Recommendations
Build a national system to directly monitor adult literacy and numeracy skills
Build a national system to monitor participation in adult literacy programmes – and the characteristics of participants
Target 4.6 refers to literacy and numeracy skills. The global indicator shifts attention from thinking whether an individual is literate or not to a more nuanced concept of levels of proficiency in literacy skills. However, such data is only available for very few rich countries, which participate in relevant assessments.
As such assessments are prohibitively expensive to run in poorer countries, international coordination will be needed to support countries to develop their own literacy and numeracy assessments. These will need to strike a careful balance between letting a country proceed on its own and ensuring assessments reach global quality standards.
In the absence of data on literacy proficiency levels, reporting based on traditional literacy rates fills the gap. In Cambodia, according to the official estimate 22% of adults lack any literacy skills.
There are major challenges in monitoring adult participation in literacy programmes. This is partly because of the diversity of providers and partly because of the general lack of interest in monitoring adult education opportunities.

12. Evidence Recommendations
Target 4.7: Sustainable development / global citizenship
Global indicator: There is no data on the extent to which (i) global citizenship education and (ii) education for sustainable development are mainstreamed in (a) national education policies (b) curricula (c) teacher education and (d) student assessments
Thematic indicator (example): There is no data on the percentage of students showing adequate understanding of issues relating to global citizenship and sustainable development
Evidence
Recommendations
An approach needs to be taken towards monitoring the content of education and what is taught in classrooms: collect and communicate information about the content of curricula; coordinate with other countries in the region through regional or international organizations to work on the task
Monitoring progress towards target 4.7 on sustainable development and global citizenship is not easy. Currently, there is no data on the global indicator. The GEM Report feels that this target needs a more rigorous approach of monitoring the content of education and what is taught in classrooms and offers examples of relevant analyses of curricula and textbooks.
A more systematic listing of national curriculum frameworks and textbook content would be informative about national commitment to sustainable development. Such information could be usefully exchanged at the regional level between countries with similar contexts.
Beyond content, it is also essential to think of desirable results. There are some assessments of civic skills or scientific knowledge mainly targeting richer countries. But there is no global consensus yet on what these relevant skills are – and what prospects there are for countries to reach common ground.

13. Evidence Recommendations Target 4.a: Learning environments
Global indicator: In Cambodia, 7% of primary and 24% secondary schools had access to electricity, and 3% of primary and secondary schools had access to computers for pedagogical purposes, in 2012.
Thematic indicator (example): 22% of 13- to 17-year-olds reported being bullied at least 2-3 times a month in the couple of months preceding the survey in 2013.
Evidence
Recommendations
Introduce regular monitoring of school infrastructure
Ensure different types of measures of violence in school are developed and monitored – and work to align with other countries’ definitions
While Target 4a is based on the principles of a child-friendly school – child- centredness, democratic participation and inclusiveness – not all these are possible to monitor at a global level. Attention therefore turns to more measurable aspects of learning environments, starting with infrastructure.
In Cambodia, 7% of primary schools and 24% of secondary schools had access to electricity in At the same time more work is needed on other aspects such as standards for students with disabilities or structural safety.
Among thematic indicators, evidence is accumulating on school-related violence, a global phenomenon. In Cambodia, 22% of 13- to 17-year-olds reported being bullied at least 2-3 times a month in the couple of months preceding the survey in 2013.
It is important for the country to develop measures of school-related violence that are also aligned with definitions elsewhere in the world.

14. Evidence Recommendations Target 4.b: Scholarships
Global indicator: In 2014, US$ 13 million was awarded to Cambodia in scholarships (but this is a partial measure)
Thematic indicator (example): There is no measure of the number of scholarships
Evidence
Recommendations
Participate in process for developing a global mechanism for reporting on scholarships that includes information on the number of scholarships and the characteristics of their recipients, including their origin, destination and field of study
Target 4b on scholarships could exacerbate inequality, because beneficiaries tend to come from more advantaged backgrounds and because resources could be used for developing tertiary education systems in the respective countries. The Report finds that the formulation of the target is lacking in several respects. For example, it does not specify whether recipients should return to their home countries. While all scholarships should be monitored, they should be counted as contributing to the target only if they are at least partly publicly funded, because it is not possible to hold non-government providers to account.
There is no information on the numbers of scholarship recipients. A new global mechanism is needed for reporting on scholarships that includes information on the scholarships and their recipients, including their origin, destination and field of study.
Aid data can give some information on the volume of scholarships offered using government funds. In 2014, US$13 million in aid was allocated to scholarships and imputed student costs. But it is a weak indicator because only a few countries (such as France, Germany and Japan) report scholarships as aid.

15. Evidence Recommendations Target 4.c: Teachers
Global indicator: In 2014, all teachers in pre-primary, primary and lower-secondary education have received at least the minimum organized teacher training.
Thematic indicator (example): The pupil/trained teacher ratio in primary education was 45:1 in 2014.
Evidence
Recommendations
Collaborate with other countries to develop comparable measures of qualified and trained teachers
Personnel databases need to be better linked to overall EMIS to monitor the distribution of teachers, their working conditions and attrition rates
Consider expanding tools that collect information directly from teachers, for example on their continuous professional development
There is a dearth of data on monitoring target 4c on teachers. In the case of the global indicator, the main challenge is the lack of a consistent definitions of what is a trained teacher, as standards vary a lot across countries. According to the national definition, all primary and lower-secondary school teachers are trained in Cambodia.
The target is also quite unambitious in focusing only on the supply of qualified teachers. For that reason, the GEM Report also looks at the issues of teachers motivation and support, which are presented in the Framework for Action. But around the world information is patchy because personnel databases are not closely linked to overall education management information systems.
Other aspects call for different sources. For example, assessing teacher pay relative to other professions requires the use of labour force surveys. Assessing teacher professional development requires direct surveys of teachers. Such tools exist for high income countries and should be considered for use in low and middle income countries.

16. Evidence Recommendations Finance
There is no global indicator but countries are committed to spend at least 4% of GDP and/or at least 15% of government expenditure on education.
In Cambodia, the government spent 2% of GDP and 10% of government expenditure on education in 2013 (UIS).
Evidence
Recommendations
A comprehensive picture of all finance sources is needed: institutionalize national education accounts approach to capture government, external and household financing sources
A lack of adequate and equitable finance was a key reason why the world fell short of achieving the Education for All goals between 2000 and Yet no SDG 4 target specifically relates to education finance. On the other hand, the Education Framework for Action calls on countries to allocate at least 4% of GDP and at least 15% of total government expenditure to education. Cambodia does not meet any of these two thresholds.
What is also emerging is that looking separately at financing from governments or donors is not sufficient. To get a comprehensive view of how much is being spent on education from all diverse sources, national education accounts are needed following the example of health. This is likely to highlight the extent to which households often have to pick up a large part of the bill.

17. Recommendations: National level
Build capacity
Equity: Education ministries should use the findings on inequalities in national education systems, and feed into questions in household surveys.
Establish a national assessment framework that monitors a range of learning outcomes, including skills of those not in school.
A focus on education quality should mean more than just a focus on learning outcomes - include curricula and textbooks too.
Monitor fuller range of lifelong learning opportunities, including adult education.
Share best practices within organizations of regional cooperation.
Finance: Use national education accounts approach to improve monitoring.
Credit: UNESCO/Nguyen Thanh Tuan
Looking at each target separately is likely to overwhelm policy makers as to what needs to be done as a matter of priority. The Report recommends six key steps to strengthen national monitoring of education in the next 3 to 5 years:
Ministries of education are not always aware of the extent of education inequality. Outside of Education Management Information Systems, other evidence produced by national statistical agencies through household or labour force surveys can produce highly relevant information. Ministries of education should be more involved in the design of such surveys and the use of their results.
If they have not done so already, countries should establish a sample-based national learning assessment to monitor progress in a range of learning outcomes over time. They should also seek to monitor the skills of those who have left school early.
Assessing the quality of education cannot be reduced to learning outcomes. It should include looking at policies, curricula, textbooks and teacher education programmes, judging them against the way they address tolerance, human rights, and sustainability, for instance.
Schooling alone cannot deliver all the expected outcomes from improved education by We need to focus on lifelong learning, yet at present, the education opportunities of adults are barely being monitored at all. 
Countries should be encouraged to engage in debates and exchange ideas on good practices of key education policies, for example how to address disadvantage in education. This could be best achieved within regional organizations engaged in education, as examples from Europe and Latin America suggest.
Finally, countries are encouraged to adopt a national education accounts approach to improve monitoring of education spending not only from governments and donors but also from households, which would help understand better whether the costs are shared fairly.

18. gemreportunesco.wordpress.com/
Bitly.com/sdg4all
Blog:
gemreportunesco.wordpress.com/
We have come to the end of the presentation.
Thank you for listening. The findings and recommendation in this report speak to so many different audiences and sectors, and we will need all your support in helping us disseminate them widely.
Please do join in the conversation and find out more via our website, or on twitter with the hashtag #sdg4all.
#SDG4All
@GEMreport