Injaz Remedial Numeracy Program: Midterm evaluation report (Raqqa Governorate, Syria, November 2018)

Report
from US Department of State
Published on 30 Nov 2018

This report was prepared for Chemonics International Inc. by Dr. Brenda Sinclair in collaboration with Chemonics’ Injaz project team.

Executive Summary

This report presents the results of a midterm evaluation for the Injaz remedial numeracy program, funded by the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) and the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs (NEA). The midterm evaluation took place between September and October 2018 in seven child centers after six weeks of the 12-week course. The evaluation assesses students’ learning so that child center teachers can modify instruction to improve student performance. An ASER test in December 2018 and January 2019 will compare results against the baseline and determine overall learning outcomes.

A total of 1,732 children enrolled in the Injaz remedial program took the midterm exam. Of these, 65 percent were in the emerging level and 35 percent were in the developing level. Near-equal proportions of boys and girls participated at both levels. Students’ ages ranged from 5 to 18 in the emerging level and from 7 to 17 in the developing level.

The midterm evaluation shows promising results after only six weeks. Students in both the emerging and developing levels performed very well, with 72 percent and 90 percent passing each level, respectively.

The maximum score possible on each test is 100 points, and the passing score is 41 points or higher. On average, students scored 57 points in the emerging level and 69 points in the developing level. The distribution of scores shows that nearly half of emerging-level students and 70 percent of developing-level students scored 61 points or higher, indicating a high degree of competency in the three math skill areas tested: number sense, addition, and subtraction. Emerging-level students scored similarly across all three competencies (55 to 60 percent correct) while developing-level students showed a stronger grasp of addition (73 percent correct) and subtraction (61 percent correct). An analysis by sex, age, center, and location found no significant differences for sex and age, but found stark differences between centers and for internally displaced persons (IDPs). At the emerging level, Partner C/Location 1, located in an IDP camp, had the lowest overall score (49 points); Partner I, which has 19 students, scored the highest (65 points). At the developing level, Afaq center B, Partner G, and Partner E achieved the highest scores (over 80 points); Partner C/Location 1 scored the lowest. All centers performed quite well at the developing level, scoring between 64 and 84 points.

Compared to non-IDPs, IDPs scored 18 points lower at the emerging level and 15 points lower at the developing level. IDPs also had significantly lower pass rates (63 percent versus 83 percent for non-IDPs at the emerging level). The competencies with the largest gaps for IDPs at both levels were number sense and addition. Considering that IDPs constitute 55 percent of emerging-level students tested and 64 percent of developing-level students tested, they may need a targeted intervention to improve their overall scores and pass rates.