The Devil is in the System: An systems-level look at education policy impediments in Jordan

• In Event: A comparative analysis of inequalities in national education systems: Case studies from Ethiopia, Jordan, Uganda, and Chile

Proposal

Introduction/Background:
Education systems are composed of a multitude of components that are often misaligned with one another. For example, the ministry may state the existence of a policy, but that policy is not resourced, not enforced, or simply not aligned with what is measured. For example, a government or NGO may implement a well-intentioned program to increase critical thinking for students; yet teachers are not adequately trained in how to execute this program, student assessments are not aligned to critical thinking skills, and the scope of curriculum that teachers have to cover is not modified to accommodate the extra time necessary to teach such skills. The program is incoherent with the system in which teachers and students are embedded and, as a result, the program fails. This incoherence of system elements tends to increase in areas of conflict and crisis, where crises exert new pressures on the education system and international donors and actors introduce their own priorities and system components. In fact, this isolated “project dominated” approach to education aid is favored by most international donors and arguably dominates the field (Niño-Zarazúa, 2016).

Context:
The Kingdom of Jordan, a country of roughly 10 million citizens, has weathered several crises in past years that have seriously impacted its public education system. 1.4 million Syrians have sought refuge in Jordan since 2011 more than 80% of whom live in towns and cities of Jordan rather than separate refugee camps, increasing demand on public services, including schools (Delprado, Al Nahi & Morrice, 2020). COVID-19 then exacerbated existing access and learning challenges, as all schools closed in mid-March of 2020 for nearly a year, with continued schooling interruptions for many months thereafter. Over the last 10 years, donors have spent over $2 billion USD to improve education in Jordan, but the fragmented nature of actors providing services has led to parallel and duplicative systems and few coordinating structures.

Data and Methods:
The RISE Framework
This project utilized the Research on Improving Systems of Education (RISE) diagnostic tool to find points of incoherence amongst the elements and actors of the formal public education system in Jordan. The RISE framework proposes two important dimensions for accountability in education: “relationships” and “design elements” (Silberstein & Spivack, 2022). The four major accountability relationships are: (1) Management: Relationships between the Ministry of Education (MOE) and its Agencies; (2) Client power: relationships between citizens/parents and teachers/schools; (3) Politics: Relationships between citizens and the state; and (4) Compact: Relationships between executive bodies of the state and the MOE. The RISE framework also describes five “design elements” through which the principal can influence the behavior of the agent in each accountability relationship. These are: (1) Delegation: What are the principal’s objectives for the agent? (2) Information: What information is collected/used to determine how well objectives are met? (3) Resourcing: What resources (including financing) are provided to meet these objectives? (4) Motivation: What are the consequences (positive or negative) if the agents succeed or fail to meet these objectives? And (5) Support: How is the agent supported to meet these objectives?
Researchers first conducted a stakeholder mapping of the education system in Jordan, with a focus on actors who influenced education in conflict and crisis settings. Then a desk review was conducted on recent national education policy documents, a political economy analysis, and the outputs of related research projects. Based on their ranking in the stakeholder mapping process, influential stakeholders (n=10) were invited to a workshop to both jointly determine a focal topic for the RISE diagnostic as well as to provide additional information that could not be sourced from the desk review. Stakeholders also assisted in nominating additional key informants to the research team for interviews. Coding of all data—inclusive of the policy documents and interview data—were completed according to work by Silberstein and Spivack (2022), which determines whether components of the system are aligned for learning, access, socialization, or patronage/interest groups.

Selected Preliminary Results:
Results focused on curricular and teacher relationships and processes. Within each focal area, several incoherences were found. For example, the Ministry has implemented reforms to increase teacher professionalization. However, teachers are regulated by two distinct departments – the MoE as well as the Civil Services Bureau (Aljaghoub, 2012). Civil Services Bureau regulations determine teacher career outcomes, which are not tied to the policies desired by the MoE. Additionally, nearly 10,000 teachers (one-eighth of the public school workforce) are contract teachers who can neither participate in CSB ranking structures (that determine pay) nor professional development. Similarly, teacher trainers are in short supply, and supervisors commonly fill the role that provide little to no pedagogical support.

Implications:
Teacher professionalization and curricular interventions remain high priorities for both low- and high-income contexts to achieve equitable education for students. However, interventions must align with the system in which education actors are embedded in order to succeed. Implications will be discussed both for the Jordanian context—inclusive of which misalignments were prioritized for intervention and why—as well as for systems thinking for the field of education at large.

Authors

• Lindsay Brown, NYU Global TIES

• Emilee Rauschenberger, Queen Rania Foundation for Education and Development

• Celine Ammash