2.F Developing a Contextual Assessment for OOS 15 year olds

Three Major Constraints Maintaining and integrating existing PISA measures to collect reliable and valid data on educational and family contexts Developing meaningful constructs and indices that can be used cross-nationally whilst based on PISA frameworks Using measures in analyses to address issues relevant nationally and internationally

Starting from the Strand B Contextual Framework How far should Strand C use a framework built around concepts of learning and schooling? How much correspondence should there be between contextual assessment for Strand C and Strand B? Segments of the contextual questionnaires developed under Strand B can be used for Strand C, although most specific school- related questions will not be relevant.

Modular Approach As it has been suggested for the cognitive component of Strand C, the contextual assessment might be composed of modular elements to adapt to the heterogeneity of OOS 15 year olds. An adaptive contextual assessment might include:  A core set of personal, socio cultural, and contextual characteristics and processes that pertain to all 15 year olds in Strand C  A filtered subset of extra questions to assess the lifetime relationship of the 15 year old to school, or not

Importance of Current Status Modifications for Strand C should therefore focus firstly on the 15 year olds’ current status and the reasons for that status. These reasons may or may not include being excluded or ‘pushed-out’ or ‘pulled out’ of school. Modifications need to focus on: – activity patterns; – household characteristics; – an alternative to the household facility; – educational experiences; – and socio-economic status.

Activity Patterns Questions should be included on: – current ‘employment’ status (asked to both in- school and out-of-school); – types of employment (formal and informal); – other types of learning, cultural, social, sports activities; – caring activities;

Household Characteristics (1) Socio-demographics: – gender, – household size, – ethno/religious group, and – urban/rural location Financial and economic management of the household – income, income shocks – child work – migration

Household Characteristics (2) Intra-household Relationships – presence of parents – number of dependent children – birth order of index child – relationship of index child to caregiver and other members of household – authority and decision making Health – Index child’s health – health conditions of family members – disability (index child or family members) – pregnancy

Educational Context & Experiences Household Educational Context – parental and caregiver education – parental values about school – educational experiences of other children being looked after by their caregiver – educational resources in household Sub-set of questions for the Index 15 year old  educational career including access and exit,  if ever in-school, age at first enrolment, and  interest and involvement in reading practices.

Questions for Drop-Outs For All What was the main reason why you took your child out of school? Distance, Expense, Needed at Home, Needed in Family Business For those who dropped out in last 2 years “Cost” of school: – Fees – transportation, – uniforms, – food, – ensuing security The school in the community – Credit availability, – Job market assessment viz- a-viz choice of persistence in education Personal experience with school: – Achievement and perceived learning, – Engagement, – Grade repetition – Teacher-student relationships – Violence and safety – Time in school: effective learning time and withdrawals resources, motivations

PISA Socio Economic Status PISA index of Economic, Social and Cultural Status (ESCS) includes: occupation status of the parent with the highest occupational status, the number of years of education of the parent with the highest educational attainment and an index of home possessions that includes measure of wealth, educational possessions and cultural possessions (including the number of books at home (Willms and Tramonte, 2014).

SES in Developing Countries Thirty years ago, Carr-Hill and Lavers (1985) argued that a single ‘SES’ construct is not always useful. Recent surveys in Kenya, Tanzania and Zambia in vulnerable areas, factor scores were calculated separately for housing conditions, modern assets and agro-pastoral assets (Carr-Hill, 2014). The correlation coefficients with the single exception of the between modern assets and household living conditions in the Zambia sample, are all low with less than 10% of common variance

Questions for discussion  What can be covered in 20 minutes?  How can complex topics and transitions can be surveyed using grade 5 or less vocabulary?  How much overlap should there be between Strand B and Strand C questionnaires?  Who are the best informants for Strand C?  How many questionnaires?  What should be the role of the interviewer in terms of capturing the contextual characteristics?