Higher education systems worldwide are faced with an intractable tension between the demands of quality, equity and funding (Unterhalter and Carpentier 2010). On the one hand, there are strong pressures for equitable expansion of enrolments, driven by both supply-side factors-principally the perceived importance of higher education for the knowledge economy-and demand-side factors, namely the increasing number of secondary leavers seeing university degrees as the primary means of economic betterment and social mobility. On the other hand, universities are grappling with the challenges of maintaining quality in the face of rapid expansion, particularly as massification implies both a rise in sheer numbers of students and an increasing diversity of incoming students, including in terms of academic preparation for university. The conundrum is further deepened by constraints on public funding and the uncertainties associated with alternative private sources.While all countries struggle to reconcile the competing demands of budgetary constraints and high levels of university participation, the issues faced in low-and middleincome countries (LIMCs) are distinctive for a number of reasons. First, resource constraints (particularly in low-income countries) present severe limitations, both in terms of available public funding for the higher education system and with regard to the possibilities of cost-sharing with students and their families. Second, as a result of public resource constraints, higher education systems in lower-income contexts have traditionally been restricted to a small elite population and, as a result, rapid expansion represents a significant and destabilising shock. Third, even when funding is in place, such systems have limited capacity to expand, due to the insufficient number of qualified academic faculty able to staff institutions. Fourth, quality challenges at the primary and secondary levels in such contexts tend to lead to a high proportion of under-prepared students entering & Rebecca Schendel

The rhetoric around decentralisation suggests school-based management improves education outcomes. Existing reviews on school-based decision-making have tended to focus on proximal outcomes and offer very little information about why school-based decision-making has positive or negative effects in different circumstances. The authors systematically searched for and synthesised evidence from 35 quantitative and qualitative studies evaluating 17 individual interventions on the effectiveness of school-based decision-making on educational outcomes. Devolving decision-making to the level of the school appears to have a somewhat beneficial effect on dropout, repetition and teacher attendance. Effects on test-scores are more robust, being positive in aggregate and for middle-income countries specifically. On the other hand, school-based decision-making reforms appear to be less effective in communities with generally low levels of education, where parents have low status relative to school personnel. The authors conclude that school-based decision-making reforms are less likely to be successful in highly disadvantaged communities.

Critical thinking is frequently proposed as one of the most important learning outcomes of a university education. However, to date, it has been difficult to ascertain whether university students in low-income contexts are improving in their critical thinking skills, because the limited studies in this domain have relied on instruments developed in Western contexts, despite the clear dangers of such an approach. Cultural bias in assessment can best be overcome by explicitly developing tests for use in specific contexts. However, resource constraints often prevent this possibility. An alternative strategy is to adapt an existing instrument for use in a particular context. Although adaptation is the norm for high-stakes cross-cultural assessments, it is often not attempted for single country research studies. This may be due to an assumption that adaptation is excessively technical or will add significantly to a study timeline. In this article, which relies on data from a recent study in Rwanda, we present a methodology for adapting a performance-task-based assessment of critical thinking. Our experience with this methodology suggests that small teams can adapt instruments in a relatively short time frame, and that the benefits of doing so far outweigh any cost.

No abstract

A recent study of student learning at three of Rwanda's most prestigious public universities has suggested that Rwandan students are not improving in their critical thinking ability during their time at university. This article reports on a series of faculty-level case studies, which were conducted at two of the participating institutions in order to investigate some of the reasons behind these results. Although educational practices likely to foster critical thinking skills are required elements of the undergraduate curriculum at both institutions, the case study analysis suggests that these practices are being fundamentally altered during implementation, because of a limited understanding of the rationale for pedagogical change and low levels of faculty motivation to implement more laborintensive teaching methods. The findings suggest that teaching and learning policies are only likely to be effective if accompanied by pedagogical training and support for ongoing faculty development.

While critical thinking is widely regarded as a key outcome of higher education, research has shown that in practice it is only developed when certain conditions are in place, relating to the pedagogical approach, the nature of the curriculum and the level of challenge, amongst other factors. This article reports on findings from a four-year mixed methods study in Botswana, Ghana and Kenya, aiming to investigate the factors underpinning the successful development of critical thinking amongst undergraduate students. A two-stage critical thinking assessment was conducted with students in 15 sites, showing that only some of the institutions were ensuring significant gains in students' critical thinking, even when endorsing learner-centered methods. The study points to the central importance of teaching orientations amongst lecturers, involving a deep shift in approaches to knowledge, and a facilitation rather than a transmission approach.

This Campbell systematic review assesses the effectiveness of school‐based decision‐making. The review summarises findings from 17 impact studies and nine studies of barriers and enablers. School‐based decision‐making has small effects in reducing dropouts and repetition. There is a moderate positive effect on average test scores, though the effects are smaller for language and maths. The effects are not large, but comparable to those found in many other effective educational interventions. The positive impact is found in middle‐income countries, with no significant effect in lowincome countries. School‐based decision‐making reforms appear to have a stronger impact on wealthier students with more educated parents, and for children in younger grade levels. School‐based decision‐making reforms appear to be less effective in disadvantaged communities, particularly if parents and community members have low levels of education and low status relative to school personnel. Plain language summary SCHOOL‐BASED DECISION‐MAKING HAS POSITIVE EFFECTS ON EDUCATION OUTCOMES – BUT LESS SO IN LOW‐INCOME COUNTRIESDecentralising decision‐making to schools has small to moderate positive effects in reducing repetition and dropouts, and increasing test scores. These effects are mainly restricted to middle‐income countries, with fewer and smaller positive effects found in low‐income countries or disadvantaged communities. WHAT DID THE REVIEW STUDY?Many governments have addressed the low quality of education by devolving decision‐making authority to schools. It is assumed that locating decision‐making authority within schools will increase accountability, efficiency and responsiveness to local needs.However, there is limited evidence of the effectiveness of these reforms, especially from low‐income countries. Existing reviews on school‐based decision‐making have tended to focus on proximal outcomes and offer very little information about why school‐based decision‐making has positive or negative effects in different circumstances.This review addresses two questions: 1. What is the impact of school‐based decision‐making on educational outcomes in low‐ and middle‐income countries (L&MICs)? 2. What are the barriers to, and enablers of, effective models of school‐based decision‐making? What studies are included?Included studies for the analysis of impact evaluated the change in decision‐making authority from a higher level of decision‐making authority to the level of the school on educational outcomes. Outcomes were either proximal, for example attrition, equality of access, increased enrolment, or final, for example test scores, psychosocial and non‐cognitive skills. Included studies had to have a comparison group and data which were collected since 1990.The analysis of impact included 26 studies, covering 17 interventions. The review identified nine studies to assess barriers and enablers of school‐based decision‐making. WHAT ARE THE MAIN FINDINGS OF THIS REVIEW?School‐based decision‐making has small effects in reducing dropouts and repet...

No abstract