# Developing an Inclusive Social Policy: Azerbaijan’s IDP schools Center for Innovations in Education Vitaly Radsky.

## Presentation on theme: "Developing an Inclusive Social Policy: Azerbaijan’s IDP schools Center for Innovations in Education Vitaly Radsky."— Presentation transcript:

Developing an Inclusive Social Policy: Azerbaijan’s IDP schools Center for Innovations in Education Vitaly Radsky

1. Data – Is there a difference in educational achievement between IDP and non-IDP schools and regions? 2.How and Why? - Social exclusion concept 3. Policy

IDP Schools in Azerbaijan (5 regions)

Question 1: Is there a difference between the school achievement of IDP and non-IDP regions? H 0 = There is no difference between the university admission rate of IDP and non-IDP schools in Azerbaijan. H A = There is a significant difference between the university admission rate of IDP and non- IDP schools in Azerbaijan.

National χ 2 (1, N = 86857) = 38.148, p <.01. Students at IDP schools are less likely to be accepted by universities than students at non-IDP schools.

χ 2 (1, N = 74779) = 28.053, p <.01. Students at IDP schools are less likely to be accepted by universities than students at non-IDP schools.

Urban Areas χ 2 (1, N = 28962) = 47.268, p <.01. Students at IDP schools located in urban areas (including Baku) are less likely to be accepted by universities than students at non-IDP schools studying in urban areas.

Rural Areas χ 2 (1, N = 44294) = 26.667, p <.01. Students at IDP schools located in rural areas are less likely to be accepted by universities than students at non-IDP schools studying in rural areas.

Result H A = There is a significant difference between the university admission rate of IDP and non- IDP schools in Azerbaijan. Nationally, and when controlling for school location, IDP schools send proportionally fewer students to university than non-IDP schools.

IDP Schools in Azerbaijan (5 regions)

χ 2 (1, N = 21067) = 21.668, p <.01. There is a significant difference between the proportion of students accepted to university from IDP schools based in Baku and non-IDP Baku schools. The difference in proportion of students accepted to universities were significant between Baku and Susa, Fuzuli, and Agdam (but not Lachin and Qubadli).

χ 2 (1, N = 21067) = 27.493, p <.01. There is a significant difference between the proportion of students accepted to university between Baku non-IDP schools and Baku-based Susa, Fuzuli, and Agdam schools.

IDP Schools in Azerbaijan (5 regions)

(z = -3.07, p <.05, one-tailed) There is a significant difference between the proportion of students accepted to university between Lachin Baku and Sumgayit based schools and non-IDP schools In Baku and Sumgayit.

(z = -2.933, p <.05, one-tailed) There is a significant difference between the proportion of students accepted to university between Lachin rural-based schools and non-IDP schools based in the rural regions where Lachin schools are located.

Result H A = There is a significant difference between the university admission rate of IDP and non- IDP schools in Azerbaijan. When controlling for school location, IDP schools send proportionally fewer students to university than non-IDP schools.

Question 2: What role does geography have in the differing results of IDP schools? H 0 = There is no difference in the university admission rate in schools in different IDP regions in Azerbaijan. H A = There is a significant difference in the university admission rate between schools in different IDP regions in Azerbaijan.

χ 2 (9, N = 3942) = 77.53886, p <.01. There is a significant difference in the proportion of students admitted to university between IDP districts.

IDP Schools in Azerbaijan (5 regions)

χ 2 (4, N = 1156) = 3.836, p >.1. There is no significant difference between the proportion of students accepted to university among students studying in urban-based IDP schools (5 IDP regions).

χ 2 (2, N = 1339) = 4.3695, p >.1. There is no significant difference between the proportion of students accepted to university among students studying in rural-based IDP schools (5 IDP regions).

Result H o = There is not a significant difference in the university admission rate between schools in different IDP regions in Azerbaijan, once location of school is controlled. What separates overall lower achieving IDP regions such as Agdam and higher achieving regions such as Qubadli is school location, rather than something like regional education management.

Social Exclusion “a way of conceptualizing society, including (and with a focus on) the processes of deprivation that are an integral part of that society.” -de Haan, 2000 1) Multidimensionality 2) Causation (how and why) – interactions, processes, actors, and institutions that “include some groups and exclude others.” -de Haan, 2000

Stigma and Isolation “Some people compare Sumgait schools with Sumgait IDP school—this is not fair. They have richer parents, we have a IDP status label, that is why there is a small number of students who want to come to our school.” (Qubadli teacher, FGD, 2011)

Educational Human Resources “a good young teacher will never chose an IDP school over a regular school when choosing a job.” (Baku Education Inspector, Interview, 2011)

Conclusion 1. Disadvantaged or Not? We need more data comparing educational results of IDP and non-IDP students. 2. Why and How? Social exclusion offers a new way to look at deprivation and inequality in Azerbaijan. 3. What Policies?