Scores, Camera, Action: Social Accountability and Teacher Incentives in Remote Areas

Abstract

The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent.

The Role of Coherence in Strengthening CommunityAccountability for Remote Schools in Indonesia

“…The impact evaluation of KIAT Guru found that all three treatments improved learning outcomes, with average effect sizes across Indonesian language and mathematics of SD = 0.08 for SAM-only, SD = 0.11 for SAM+Score, and SD = 0.20 for SAM+Cam (see Table 3 in Gaduh et al 2021; see also Gaduh et al 2020). This analysis rejected equality between SAM+Cam and the other two treatment groups (p < 0.02).…”

“…This analysis rejected equality between SAM+Cam and the other two treatment groups (p < 0.02). An additional round of data collection for SAM-only and SAM+Cam one year after the endline found that learning outcome gains persisted in SAM+Cam with an effect size of SD = 0.13 on average across the two subjects, whereas learning outcomes in SAM-only were no longer significantly different from the control group (see Table 3 in Gaduh et al 2021; see also Gaduh et al 2020). 7 In addition to the quantitative impact evaluation, a second study drew on three rounds of detailed qualitative fieldwork in nine schools, with three schools from each of the three treatment groups.…”

“…Quantitative survey data. For impact evaluation purposes, an independent survey team collected quantitative survey data during three different periods (Gaduh et al 2021).…”

“…The SAM+Cam treatment group achieved the best all-around results (Gaduh et al 2020;World Bank 2020). A follow-up impact evaluation conducted one year after the endline survey showed that the gains persisted in SAM+Cam (Gaduh et al 2021). Additionally, a prior qualitative study of KIAT Guru concluded that SAM+Cam was the most effective treatment group because it empowered local community members to hold school leaders and teachers accountable.…”

“…For more on the theoretical underpinnings of the three KIAT Guru treatment groups, refer to the impact evaluation papers (Gaduh et al, 2020(Gaduh et al, , 2021 and the qualitative fieldwork report (World Bank, 2020).…”