The Accelerated Access Initiative to Quality Formal Education for Syrian Refugee Children (AAI). Lessons learned, challenges and the way forward
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Australia, Canada, Germany, Norway, the European Union (EU) the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US) have supported the landmark commitment that the Government of Jordan made at the Supporting Syria and the Region Conference, which took place in London on February 4, 2016, to provide quality education for every child in Jordan, regardless of nationality. Over the past three years (2016-19), through the donor-funded initiative ‘Accelerating Access to Quality Formal Education for Syrian Refugee Children’ (AAI), the Government of Jordan is delivering on this promise, providing quality public education to more than 134,000 Syrian refugee children. This effort has included, among others, employing and training new teachers, financing the salaries of teachers and administrative staff, opening additional double shift schools, purchasing school books, covering tuition fees, and covering the costs for operations, maintenance and furniture in these schools. Donors have supported the Ministry of Education (MoE) by combining three different but complementary on-budget and off-budget aid modalities: (1) the EU provides on-budget support; (2) Germany provides off-budget support to the MoE narrowly earmarked for salaries of teachers and administrative staff for double shifts schools for Syrian refugees; (3) Australia, Canada, Norway, the UK and the US provide off-budget support to the MoE through the Accelerating Access Initiative ‘Special Account’ under a Joint Financing Agreement (JFA). Support to the AAI has been extended for one more year. The present report aims to support AAI donors in Jordan to explore potential funding modalities that will enable the Ministry of Education (MoE), donors and education stakeholders to continue to respond to Syrian refugees’ educational needs beyond 2019-20, and to do that in line with the MoE’s own Education Strategic Plan (ESP) 2018-22. The purpose of this report is to: • Assess current AAI aid modalities. • Map out the role and responsibilities of current stakeholders. • Capture lessons learned, challenges and achievement of AAI programming 2016-2019. • Capture preferences and redlines of AAI stakeholders to inform discussions for the next phase of support to Jordan. Three research questions guide this report: 1. What are the roles and responsibilities of current educational stakeholders? 2. What are the achievements and the challenges of the three AAI aid modalities, and what lessons have been learned? 3. What are the donors’ preferences and redlines for future aid support? Research was based on an in-depth literature review on aid modalities that focused on definitions and debates, with a view to proposing a common language and understanding of the key concepts in use. Semi-structured interviews with key educational stakeholders were conducted via phone, Skype or other online platforms between May 28 and June 16, 2019. Interviews were divided in three groups: (i) AAI donors – i.e., Australia, Canada, Germany, Norway, the EU and the UK; (ii) Ministry of Education officials – i.e., the Secretary General, the Development and Cooperation Unit Coordinator, the Research Department Director, the Research and Planning Directorate Director; (iii) other educational stakeholders – i.e., Relief International, Save the Children, UNICEF, the World Bank (WB). Interviews explored several critical issues, such as assessing programme impact against objectives, donor coordination structures, relationship among donors and between them and the Ministry of Education, lessons learned for each aid modality, preferences and redlines for future aid programming.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,016 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,018 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,031 | 0,005 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».