Purpose Chile has developed the school improvement networks (SINs) strategy to support the work of school leaders. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the functioning and effect of the SINs strategy as perceived by principals and curriculum coordinators across the country. Design/methodology/approach An adapted version of the Educational Collaborative Network Questionnaire was applied to a sample of 1,723 participants from 1,375 schools distributed in 398 networks. Descriptive, factor and sub-group statistical analyses by school performance categories and by different roles within these schools and networks are presented. Findings Results indicate that school leaders perceive SINs as an opportunity to work effectively in shared projects that can later be implemented in their own schools. Participants indicate that they can share knowledge in their networks and use it to solve problems in their own schools, which is especially relevant for secondary school leaders who work in difficult circumstances. Results suggest that it is important to facilitate greater autonomy for school leaders in their networks, especially regarding decision making about network goals and activities that are more significant to their contexts. Originality/value This is a national study of a recent school improvement strategy, which provides evidence, from the perspective of school leaders, of its strengths and improvement areas. This study shows that despite being in a competitive context, principals and curriculum coordinators value the opportunities to learn from and with others. These results can be of value for other contexts attempting to promote school networks as a means for school and system improvement.

Background: A steady increase in the international production and consumption of fish has positioned aquaculture as a development option. Previous literature has highlighted the potential of aquaculture to improve economic, nutritional and gender equality outcomes, however, the evidence on the effectiveness of these programmes remains unclear.Objectives: The review assessed whether aquaculture interventions increase the productivity, income, nutrition, and women's empowerment of individuals. We additionally aimed to identify barriers and facilitators that could affect the effectiveness of these interventions, and the cost-effectiveness of such programmes. Methods:We searched for experimental and quasi-experimental studies focused on low-and middle-income countries. We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Campbell Collaboration for the data collection and analysis.Results: We identified 21 impact evaluations assessing the effect of 13 aquaculture interventions in low-and lower-middle income countries. Twelve of these studies have a high risk of bias. Aquaculture interventions lead to a small increase in the production value, income, total expenditures and food consumption of participants.The limited availability of evidence prevented us from assessing other nutritional and women's empowerment outcomes. We identified barriers and facilitators affecting the programmes' set up, the participation of beneficiaries, and the level of productive activities. Insufficient cost data hindered full comparisons across programmes. Conclusions:The review suggests a lack of rigorous evidence assessing the effectiveness of aquaculture programmes. Future research could focus on evaluating nutrition and women's empowerment impacts, promoting reporting standards, and the use of cost data to continue building quality evidence around aquaculture interventions.

The review aims to examine and synthesise the state of the evidence around what works to improve productivity, income, nutrition and women's empowerment outcomes of households involved in aquaculture in low‐ and middle‐income countries. We are particularly interested in addressing the following research questions: (1) Do aquaculture interventions increase the productivity, income, nutrition and empowerment of individuals engaged in aquaculture and their households in low‐ and middle‐income countries? (2) Do aquaculture interventions generate income and nutrition spillover effects beyond the farmers' households? (3) To what extent do the effects of aquaculture interventions vary by intervention type, population group, and location? In particular, to what extent do effects vary by gender? (4) What are the potential barriers and facilitating factors that impact the effectiveness of aquaculture interventions? (5) What is the cost‐effectiveness of different aquaculture interventions focused on productivity, income, nutrition and empowerment outcomes?

No abstract

Are lotteries the best chance for the success of students and schools? A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis on school randomised admissions Several school systems or specific school programs around the world involve the use of lotteries to assign students into schools. This admission mechanism is usually favoured to foster equality of opportunities in education. However, there has not been an effort to systematise existing evaluations of this type of interventions. This review protocol proposes to contribute to the literature on this topic with a systematic search and a metaanalysis, from an international perspective, of the effects that randomised school admissions have on student academic performance and school socioeconomic composition measures. The results and policy implications will serve as a new and relevant contribution for researchers and policy makers related to school choice, and for education authorities involved with school lotteries.