NESP III STEERING 

COMMITTEE MEETING

QUALITY AND 
RELEVANCE
Ministry of Education – March 3, 2019
 Quality and Relevance
Contents • Curriculum Reform
• Learning Assessment
• Teacher Education
• School Construction
 Progress 
Update: 
Curriculum 
Reform
 Way 
Forward: 
Curriculum 
Reform
Challenges:
Curriculum
Reform
 Progress 
Update: 
Learning 
Assessment
 • Inception report prepared by ACER
• Present survey report on effectiveness of FA techniques
applied by teachers trained.

Way  • Review the developed FA guide book and training

manual
Forward:  • Finalize Learning Assessment rules and regulation (Liha)

Learning 
and endorse
• Developed operational plan for NAFA implementation.

Assessment • Developed a comprehensive training package and tools

• Train staff to enhance their technical capacity in FA and
items developing.
• Develop roadmap for implementation of National Item’s
Bank
Challenges: • Forming of LA Directorate Tashkeel.
• In-replacement of LA Director
Learning
Assessment
Progress  • First draft of the Teacher Policy developed

Update: 
• A consultation meeting was held with the HR,
Planning, TED directors and WB consultant to review

Teacher 
the draft.
• Consultation meeting was held with DM Curriculum

Education and Teacher Education and relevant directors. The

Teacher Policy Draft was reviewed and next steps were
planned.
 Way • Consolidation of inputs on three sections
Forward:  (teacher planning, recruitment and quality)
Teacher  policy.
and finalization of the First draft of the teacher

Education • Sharing the first draft of Teacher Policy with

WB.
 •
Challenges:
Teacher
Education
 • Developed a Concept Note rationalising the need for a school

Progress  Infrastructure policy

• A taskforce established among MoE, MRRD and MoUDL and a

Update: ToR developed for the same to work on school infrastructure

policy

School  • The kick-off meeting of taskforce was held with the H.E Deputy
Minister of General Education

Infrastructu • Review of contextual documents and current situation analysis

• Draft School Infrastructure policy direction and policy structure
re Policy and held TF meeting to review and finalise the same
• Draft school infrastructure policy statements
• Rounds of taskforce meeting to review and finalise the policy
statements
 • Finalisation of school infrastructure policy
statements by the TF members
• Hold a consultative workshop with
Way  stakeholders to gather their comments and
feedback on draft policy statements to further
Forward: enrich the policy
• Develop a first comprehensive draft of policy
School  for review of the MoE's leadership

Infrastructu • Endorsement of Policy by the leadership of

MoE, MRRD and MoUDL
re Policy • School Mapping Exercise for planning the
distribution, size and spacing of schools and
physical facilities requirements for optimum
utilization and benefit
• Draft MoU between Ministries has been
Prepared
 It is a process of identifying current inadequacies in distribution and of
providing appropriate types and patterns of school building
Way  • School Mapping Process

Forward: • a. Specific Areas for Expansion

– (1) rationalization of existing facilities
School  – provision of new or additional facilities by • opening of new schools or upgrading existing

Mapping
ones;
– • providing additional teaching and non-teaching staff; and
– • providing new or additional buildings, furniture and equipment in institutions, etc.
 Way  b. Initial Steps in School Mapping
Forward:
(1)Diagnosis of the Existing Situation
School 
Mapping (2)Projection of future requirements
(3)Drawing up of perspective school
map
 Way 
2. Basic Data Needed for the Conduct of School Mapping

•a. Education Data

Forward: •(1) Annual Statistical Report

•(2) Geographical distribution of schools

School 
•(3) Site and catchment area conditions
•(4) Size of the existing school plant

Mapping
•For individual schools
•(1) exact location or verbal description of location
•(2) nature of catchment area (relief/land elevation, barriers to movement, predominant economic activity,
•area of immigration or population decline)
•(3) number of student spaces available in each year, indication of the state of buildings
•b. Population Data (analysis of the census)
•c. Other Planning Data
 Way 
• 3. Expected Results of School Mapping
• (1) School buildings requiring repairs

Forward:
• (2) Schools requiring additional classrooms
• (3) Opening of New Schools

School 
• (4) Phasing out of existing schools
• (5) Resource allocation

Mapping • (6) Environmental Mapping

 • In the initial discussion, the responsibilities of the

Challenges: ministries in terms of who should do the design, and if

the MoE has the authority to carry out the monitoring

 School  were ambiguous. However, the Draft MoU clearly

indicated the responsibilities of thee ministries.

Infrastructu • MUDL to share construction reports with MoE

re Policy
• More capacity building support needed for school
mapping exercise
Thank you for your attention