ANNEX 1: Examples for Teacher Policy Programs and Approaches ANNEX 1 EXAMPLES FOR TEACHER POLICY PROGRAMS AND POLICY APPROACHES Contents CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................... 2 STANDARDS FOR CPD ................................................................................................................................. 3 POLAND: STANDARDS BASED ON LEARNING OUTCOMES ..................................................................... 3 LATVIA: COMPETENCE BASED STANDARDS ........................................................................................... 3 INFORMAL CPD ........................................................................................................................................... 3 FINLAND: TUTOR TEACHERS ON ALL SCHOOLS ...................................................................................... 3 BRAZIL: CLASSROOM OBSERVATIONS AND COACHING ......................................................................... 3 THE NETHERLANDS: PEER SUPPORT AND PEER LEARNING.................................................................... 4 IRELAND: A WHOLE-SCHOOL APPROACH TO MENTORSHIP .................................................................. 4 SCHOOLS AS LEARNING ORGANIZATIONS .................................................................................................. 4 SLOVENIA: NETWORKS OF LEARNING SCHOOLS .................................................................................... 4 THE NETHERLANDS: INSPECTIONS ON SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT........................................................... 4 GEMANY, THE NETHERLANDS: SCHOOL AWARDS ................................................................................. 5 LEADERSHIP & LEADERSHIP ACADEMIES ................................................................................................... 5 SLOVENIA: NATIONAL SCHOOL FOR LEADERSHIP .................................................................................. 5 AUSTRIA: LEADERSHIP ACADEMY........................................................................................................... 5 IRELAND: CENTER FOR SCHOOL LEADERSHIP ........................................................................................ 5 TEACHER CAREERS...................................................................................................................................... 6 SINGAPORE: CAREER LADDERS .............................................................................................................. 6 1 ANNEX 1: Examples for Teacher Policy Programs and Approaches CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FINLAND: TEACHER EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME - GOVERNMENT KEY PROJECT https://minedu.fi/documents/1410845/4183002/Teacher+Education+Development+Programme+2016 2 E N T E R N M T G OV O JE C PR KEY Finland has competent teachers. Teacher education is of high quality and attractive. We can be proud about this. However, future challenges and rapid changes in the society have presented the competent teachers and the teacher education with new challenges. The Teacher Education Development Programme responds to these challenges. The programme outlines the objectives and measures that ensure that Finnish teacher education will remain strong, attractive and internationally appreciated. Valuing the teacher education and teachers as well as a teacher identity that creates new outcomes are important for the future of Finland. #opettajankoulutusfoorumi Finnish teachers are future- oriented and broad-based experts who create new pedagogical innovations and diversely utilise new learning environments. They are constantly developing their own competence and their working community. Teachers have in-depth knowledge of their field, pedagogical aptitude and knowledge of values. Teachers have courage to develop and experiment with things. They have the ability to apply new teaching innovations and skill to change their own actions. Teachers use the latest research and evaluations in developing themselves, their working community and their educational institution. Teachers’ work is supported by an extensive network, which the teachers can use to seek help from others as well as share and combine their competence at the national and international level. A number of significant changes have occurred in the operating environment of educational institutions, demanding and encouraging developing teacher education. In January 2016, the Ministry of Education and Culture appointed the Teacher Education Forum to reform the basic, introductory and continuing training of teachers. Nearly 100 members and experts of the Teacher Education Forum and its divisions have participated in working on the Teacher Educa- tion Development Programme. In addition, nearly two thousand experts in the education sector, as well as students and teachers participated in preparing the development programme through an online think tank. The results of the forum and the think tank, expert consulta- tions as well as topical research on teachers and teacher edu- cation were utilised in preparing the development programme. The development programme answers the following ques- tions: What kind of education and competence is needed in the future and how is this learned? How does change influence the teacher education? What is the common core of the teacher identity? What do all teachers have in common across different ages, education levels and subject boundaries? The strategic guidelines of the Teacher Education Develop- ment Programme determine the direction of teacher education in Finland and development of competence during the teaching career. The guidelines apply to all teachers, including early child- hood education and kindergarten, pre-primary, primary, subject and special needs teachers, guidance counsellors as well as teachers in vocational education and training, adult education, higher education institutions and liberal adult education. The following strategic guidelines determine the direction for the development of teacher training: 1. Teacher’s • Teacher students begin building the paths • Structural obstacles for flexible mobility competence of continuous learning during their studies. and studying dual qualifications will be elimi- into an entity Teacher students will participate in developing nated. Pedagogical studies will be developed Teacher’s competence will be compiled and renewing their education at all levels. so that they will provide qualifications to all lev- into a systematic entity by reforming • Competence management will be goal- els of education. the structures, objectives and operating oriented. Higher education institutions and ed- • Teacher education will increase the possi- methods of teacher education. ucational institutions will prepare competence bilities for education among people with an im- The development of competence will be development plans in collaboration with their migrant background. Teacher education provid- led with a goal-oriented approach, staff. The plans will be founded on the vision, ers will promote the qualification of those who utilising development plans. needs and estimate of competence of the edu- have completed teacher education abroad by • TEACHER educators will renew the cation providers and educational institutions. organising aptitude tests and complementary structures, objectives and operating methods studies according to the decisions on recog- of teacher education in collaboration. nition of qualifications of the Finnish National Activities supporting the development of 2. Attractive teacher Board of Education. Cultural diversity of teacher teachers’ competence form a needs-based education with well- education will be strengthened. and goal-oriented entity. This entity includes functioning structures, • Studies providing students with teacher admissions, basic education and introductory anticipation and successful qualifications are free-of-charge to the student. training as well as development of professional student admissions • Students will be ensured an opportunity competence and learning during the career. Successful student admissions will result in to apply for separate pedagogical studies after • TEACHER educators collaborate in order to the best future teachers. It will be ensured graduating with a master’s degree. The peda- crystallise the shared pedagogical competence that the demand for teachers and compe- gogical studies will be integrated in the study of teachers from early childhood education, tence needs is anticipated. The attractiveness units in the degree programmes. basic and upper secondary education and of teacher education will be ascertained with • Professional teacher education providers vocational education and training all the way inspirational and topical education. will collaborate to update the curricula of the to adult education, liberal adult education and • Higher education institutions will develop pedagogical education of teachers. In connec- higher education. Subject-specific and special the student admissions of teacher education in tion to the reform of vocational education and professional and other necessary competence cooperation. Students with the best capacity training and other reforms, it will be ensured will be defined separately for each sector. for acting as teachers will be selected in teacher that the competence of teachers is in line with • EDUCATORS in higher education institutions training. The aptitude of applicants to teacher the new system. and all vocational teachers will strengthen education will be taken into account in the • The teacher education units update the avail- their pedagogical competence. Liberal adult student admissions. able opportunities for developing competence education teachers are encouraged to obtain • TEACHER educators will recognise teacher during the career and evaluator training so that pedagogical qualifications. students’ previously acquired knowledge and they correspond with the changed practices. • Mentoring and peer support models skills and acknowledge credits based on dem- The changes allow securing an opportunity for will be established as a systematic part onstrated skills. Higher education institutions teachers to bring their competence up to date. of teacher education as a whole. will develop new methods for assessing • The availability of qualified teachers at all competence. levels of education and all over the country will be ensured. Demand for teachers as well as the • Teacher education and educational institu- tions of the development of teachers’ compe- needs of teachers for competence and training tions will strengthen co-design and teaching in tence in networks. Multiprofessional coopera- will be anticipated by regularly following the teams in cooperation between different fields tion with the labour market will be strength- teacher situation. The volumes of students in of science. The teacher’s work will be devel- ened by building networks at the regional, na- teacher education must follow the demand for oped to guide the learning process and become tional and global levels as well as between cul- teachers and the competence required in the more communal. tures. country. The education is targeted at different • Teacher education, educational institutions, • In their teaching and development of compe- education sectors based on the actual demand education providers and stakeholders will tence, educational institutions and teacher edu- for teachers. create physical, digital and social learning cation units will utilise peer support models, such environments. Teacher education and education as tutor teacher and mentor models as well as providers will strengthen the competence re- strengthen teacher networks and cooperation 3. TEACHERS AS lated to utilising different learning environments with working life. The development of profes- EXPERTS CREATING NEW pedagogically. sional competence will be realised in cooperation PEDAGOGICAL INNOVATIONS • Students, teaching staff, teacher education with workplaces. The students will be provided - FOCUS ON THE LEARNERS providers and working life representatives will with experiences of working in a multiprofes- The programmes, learning environments develop models and methods for workplace sional network and a communal learning organi- and working methods of teacher education learning and its supervision in networks. sation. will be improved to strengthen the develop- • Education providers will use regional or ment of expertise creating new outcomes. other coordinated network cooperation to The working methods used in the teacher 4. Strengthening enable the development of professional education and educational institutions will teacher education competence of teaching staff so that education emphasise a learner-oriented, research- through collaboration services will be equally accessible, have appro- based and communal approach. Teacher education will be strengthened by priate structures and be correctly scaled. • The working methods of teacher education increasingly close collaboration, networking • The Teacher Education Forum will be estab- and educational institutions are strongly and building a culture of doing things togeth- lished as a shared, permanent operating model research-based. The working methods are er. Different models of peer support and col- for bringing together the cooperation and learner-oriented and communal and support laboration will be utilised more effectively. competence of teacher education providers. the needs of diverse learners. • Teacher education units and education pro- • Teacher educators develop the pro- viders will collaborate to promote communal- grammes, learning environments and working ity, networking as well as operations across sub- 5. Developing educational methods of teacher education to enable stu- jects, educational sectors and fields of science. institution and community dents to acquire broad-based basic competence The operators will systematically construct a with professional and expertise creating new knowledge as well culture of creating things together, cooperation management and leadership as to obtain capabilities to develop their person- models for teacher education and functional The strategic leadership and management al competence and the educational institution. practices. systems of educational institutions will be • Teacher education and educational institu- • Teacher education and education providers strengthened by developing management tions will renew assessment to support learning. will improve the objectives and implementa- training. It will be ensured that teacher edu- Transfer of research findings and new pedagogical practi- ces into all teaching education and educa- tional institutions. Teachers’ capability to teach diverse learners. The competence of children and youths has deteriorated, the gap between girls and boys has become cation prepares teachers with capabilities 6. STRENGTHENING wider and differences for taking responsibility and participating in THE RESEARCH-BASED between educational leadership processes. TEACHER EDUCATION • The broad-based management skills of The utilisation of the latest research institutions have managers in the teaching sector are developed data on teaching and learning in teacher grown. by strengthening management education and education will be strengthened. Teacher systematic approach to management training. Teacher education plays an important role in education will be developed so that the Understanding the students learn an exploratory approach educational institution this alongside other management training. that creates new outcomes to be used in • Education providers and managers of their work as teachers. widely as a learning educational institutions will reinforce their pro- organisation and a fessional networks and introduce peer support • The programmes and operating approaches models and mentoring activities in developing of teacher education are based on the research communal operating competence. Participatory and team manage- in educational sciences and other essential environment. ment as well as the skills of immediate super- fields of knowledge. The education supports the development of the teachers’ professional visors at educational institutions will be im- identity towards a research-based direction. Inadequate use of proved. At the same time, teachers’ profession- a goal-oriented and al competence, development of expertise and • The teacher training educates pedagogically well-being will be promoted. apt educators and teachers who study and systematic approach • Education providers will develop the develop their own work. The teachers will in developing the apply current scientific research in their work. management of the educational institution in Teachers and teacher education providers competence of the municipality, region or their networks in teachers after basic cooperation so that the managers will have will participate in national and international time to lead and also develop their own research and development projects. training. competence with a long-term perspective. • Higher education institutions will enhance • The basic and introductory training of their research on the admissions, introductory Regional differences stage and continuing training of teacher teachers will be made to include enough education as well as the development of in developing teach- information about educational institutions, teachers’ career-long competence. ers’ competence. teaching administration as well as the statutes and principles concerned with the work • Higher education institutions support of teachers. A teacher is a societal actor who the competence and interest in research sees himself or herself as a part of the major among teacher education providers as well strategic guidelines of education. The teacher as the operations in the research networks www.minedu.fi/ is willing to take responsibility and, if necessary, between the institutions. osaaminenjakoulutus/ participate in leadership processes at the level peruskouluuudistus/ of his or her educational institution. Practical examples of the strategy opettajankoulutus- on the website (only in Finnish) foorumi d e s i g n: a h oy | p r i nt: l ö n n b e r g, 2016 The objective of the key project of knowledge and Teacher education is an entity comprising of education of the Strategic Programme of Prime Minister anticipation of the demand for teachers, admissions, Juha Sipilä’s Government is to reform Finnish education basic, introductory and continuing training of teachers from daycare to higher education institutions. The and developing competence during the career. common objective is to raise the level of competence, Fragmented models for continuing training will not increase equality and decrease drop-out rates and the accomplish the desired change. Activities supporting number of socially excluded youths. teachers’ professional development must be managed, Competence acquired once during studies is not effective, systematic and long-lasting. This activates enough for the entire teaching career, as the work of teachers to engage in collaboration and networking. teachers changes constantly. Teachers’ capabilities, Succeeding in developing teacher education personal willingness and possibilities for doing things requires reforming the operating environments and together, networking, constant development of personal culture of educational institutions in collaboration. competence and learning are key to change. It is essential The development work is based on competent, goal- to have flexibility and ability to apply one’s competence oriented and interactive management of educational to a changing and renewing operating environment. institutions. Teachers’ activity in networks and The aim is that the learners, teachers and managers partnerships is essential. The aim is to make the of educational institutions develop their competence learning of teachers and learners inspire them together in learning communities. Learning, teaching and throughout their lives. management are increasingly realised in teams. At the same time, finding the strengths of each individual Further information: is highlighted. Pedagogy is renewed by experimenting and innovating together. E N T ER N M T G OV O JE C PR KEY ANNEX 1: Examples for Teacher Policy Programs and Approaches STANDARDS FOR CPD POLAND: STANDARDS BASED ON LEARNING OUTCOMES Poland introduced in 2012 standards of teacher education based on learning outcomes. The aim was to ‘enhance the quality and importance of pedagogical practice and to improve the link of theory with practice’. These standards support providers of continuing professional development to align content to teacher needs. (EU, 2018). LATVIA: COMPETENCE BASED STANDARDS Latvia developed a new standard for the teaching profession to address the new competence- based approach to the curriculum. This standard describes the necessary skills and attitudes, professional knowledge and competences of teachers according to their professional activities and responsibilities. ESF funding is used for projects supporting the implementation of competence-based approaches to curricula through ITE and CPD activities. (EU, 2017) See Chapter 5 on EU Comparators: Learning from Experience in the European Context for more details. INFORMAL CPD In addition to formal CPD, teachers benefit a lot from informal professional development. This is the reason that some countries introduced teacher policies to stimulate informal CPD. Most programs focus on tutoring. Tutoring is used in many countries as an informal type of internal CPD for teachers. In a tutor-system, a senior (experienced) teacher assists a junior (less experienced) teacher. FINLAND: TUTOR TEACHERS ON ALL SCHOOLS Finland has a national tutor teacher model. In this model, all primary and secondary schools have a tutor who supports and advises other teachers. The aim of tutoring is to support schools and teachers in the school reform. That support includes utilization of innovative pedagogy and the promotion of digitalization of teaching, using the new and wider learning environments. Tutors both instruct individual teachers and organize guidance and support for different teacher groups. Tutor teachers are networking with their counterparts in their own municipality and in their region. There are government subsidies available both to train the tutor teachers and to finance their work. https://www.oph.fi/sites/default/files/documents/195451_oph_faktaa_express_3c_2018_e nglanti_sivut.pdf BRAZIL: CLASSROOM OBSERVATIONS AND COACHING Brazil introduces the Ceará program, a nine-month-long coaching program for secondary education teachers. The coaches provided support on practical strategies on lesson planning, classroom management and keeping students engaged. Teachers get feedback based on classroom observations and self-help resources. An impact evaluation showed that the program resulted in an overall improvement of academic outcomes of students, as well as extra instructional time for teachers and higher student engagement (Bruns, Costa and Cunha, 2017). 3 ANNEX 1: Examples for Teacher Policy Programs and Approaches THE NETHERLANDS: PEER SUPPORT AND PEER LEARNING In the Netherlands, an increasing number of schools started with a teacher oriented program for peer support and peer learning. The aim of this program, called Foundation ‘Leerkracht’ (Teacher), is professionalization of teachers and a continuous improvement of school culture. This bottom-up capacity building program is based on teachers working together to improve their teaching with school principals strongly engaged in the process of school improvement. The main element of the program are collaborative strategies for team teaching and team learning. Teachers meet regularly to prepare lessons, to observe each other's lessons, discuss the outcomes of pupil learning and school quality with students, parents and other partners. The main results of this program are increasing teacher quality, higher teacher motivation and satisfaction and better student results. https://stichting-leerkracht.nl/ IRELAND: A WHOLE-SCHOOL APPROACH TO MENTORSHIP Mentoring is an effective way to support starting teachers in the first phase of their teaching careers. In Ireland, the mentoring program is not restricted to the individual newly qualified teachers, but also includes a whole-school approach. The program called Droichead (Irish for 'bridge') includes both school-based and additional professional learning activities for new teachers, but also establishes a support team of experienced teachers who work collaboratively to support their novice colleagues in their entry into both the school and the profession. This Professional Support Team provides support for new teachers, but also functions as a bridge between the new teachers, the other teachers and the school staff. In addition, the Droichead program provides follow-up support and professional development to both the newly qualified teachers, support team and the school team. More information can be found at: http://www.teachingcouncil.ie/en/Teacher-Education/Droichead/ SCHOOLS AS LEARNING ORGANIZATIONS SLOVENIA: NETWORKS OF LEARNING SCHOOLS Slovenia started Networks of Learning Schools in order to encourage team learning and collaboration among schools. The networks consist of six to eight schools (gymnasiums and VET) of the same education level and type sharing similar challenges. The networks are organized and coordinated by the Slovenian National School for Leadership in Education (NSLE). The school development teams of the schools within the network meet regularly, receive training and help each other with self-evaluation and managing changes. (EU 2017) See Chapter 5 on EU Comparators: Learning from Experience in the European Context for more details. THE NETHERLANDS: INSPECTIONS ON SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT In 2017 the Dutch Inspectorate of Education introduced a new inspection approach focused on school improvement. This approach replaced an inspection scheme in which schools were inspected based on a standardized list of minimum criteria. This previous approach resulted in a situation where most schools in the Netherlands only focused on the minimum requirements with little motivation to perform above the minimum standards. The new inspection scheme keeps the minimum criteria, but also stimulates schools to work on school improvement above the minimum standards. The Inspectorate asks schools for their own ambitions and goals, and indicate additional criteria for assessment. The inspectors provides individualized feedback and recommendations for improvement and also rewards for schools that perform above average (with ‘good’ and ‘excellent’ assessment results). 4 ANNEX 1: Examples for Teacher Policy Programs and Approaches GEMANY, THE NETHERLANDS: SCHOOL AWARDS Prestigious school awards were introduced in order to stimulate schools to strive for improvement and excellence. The Deutscher Schulpreis (German School Award) is a privately funded initiative providing substantial monetary award and publicity to schools with excellent pedagogical practice in six school quality areas. The Excellente School (Excellent School) is awarded by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science in the Netherlands to schools that excel in their approach to a specific group of students or develop unique innovative and motivating school culture. The award-winning schools are promoted and function as inspiring good practice example for other schools providing opportunities for peer learning and visits. In addition, networks of these award-winning schools function in both countries. As these networks grow every year, schools stimulate and learn from each other. https://www.deutscher-schulpreis.de/der-deutsche-schulpreis-2020 https://www.excellentescholen.nl/ LEADERSHIP & LEADERSHIP ACADEMIES SLOVENIA: NATIONAL SCHOOL FOR LEADERSHIP In Slovenia, the National School for Leadership in Education runs a specialized one-year mentoring program for newly appointed school principals. The institute also organizes networks of schools principals stimulating peer learning and providing CPD activities for school leaders. http://en.solazaravnatelje.si/ More information can be found in Chapter 5 on EU Comparators: Learning from Experience in the European Context. AUSTRIA: LEADERSHIP ACADEMY In 2004 the Austrian Leadership Academy (LEA) was established to improve the qualifications of those working at an executive level in all schools (head teachers and upper management in school administration). All participants who successfully complete the LEA activities get a certificate and become a member of the Leadership Academy. Over the years, the number of members increased from 300 to over 3 000. Currently the members form an extensive LEA Membership Network providing workshops, exchange of ideas, networking and other types of peer learning and professionalization activities. To learn more: https://www.leadershipacademy.at/. (source: EU, 2017) IRELAND: CENTER FOR SCHOOL LEADERSHIP The Center for School Leadership (CSL) was established by the Irish Department of Education in partnership with the associations representing school leaders in primary and secondary education. The aims of this center is to stimulate excellence and organize support for school principals ranging from pre- appointment training, induction of newly appointed principals and CPD. Besides support for newly appointed principals, particular focus is placed on experienced principals experiencing professional difficulty and/or challenging situations. To learn more: http://www.cslireland.ie. 5 ANNEX 1: Examples for Teacher Policy Programs and Approaches TEACHER CAREERS SINGAPORE: CAREER LADDERS Singapore succeeded in making teaching a highly respected profession by a combination of a new career structure, a teacher appraisal system and rewards (bonuses) for teachers. In this system, teachers can choose between three career ladders: the teaching track, the leadership track and the specialist track. Each track consists of 13 levels with salary increases and training opportunities provided for each level. The promotion to a new level depends on the performance of teachers in the Educational Performance Management System (EPMS). All teachers are evaluated annually, based on their goals, improvement and competencies showed during observations of their teaching practice. Teachers are not only evaluated on their own performance, but also on the contribution they make to their school and community. http://ncee.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/PreparingtoLeadSingapore092617.pdf 6 Human Capital Project - October 2020 Bulgaria Human Capital Index 2020 This brief provides an update to the Human Capital Index (HCI). First launched in 2018, the HCI measures the amount of human capital that a child born today can expect to attain by age 18. It conveys the productivity of the next generation of workers compared to a benchmark of complete education and full health. Worldwide a child born in 2020 can expect, on average, to be 56 percent as productive as she could be when she grows up. All data represent the status of countries pre-COVID-19. THE HUMAN CAPITAL INDEX Human Capital Index. A child born in Bulgaria today will be 61 percent as productive when she grows up as she could be if she enjoyed complete education and full health. This is lower than the average for Europe & Central Asia region but higher than the average for Upper middle income countries. Between 2010 and 2020, the HCI value for Bulgaria decreased from 0.64 to 0.61. Figure 1 shows how the HCI and each of the components evolved over time. • Probability of Survival to Age 5. 99 out of 100 children born in Bulgaria survive to age 5. Figure 1. HCI and Components • Expected Years of School. In Bulgaria, a child who starts school at age 4 can expect to complete 12.3 years of school by her 18th birthday. Human Capital Index • Harmonized Test Scores. Students in Bulgaria score 441 on a scale .2 .4 .6 .8 1 where 625 represents advanced attainment and 300 represents mini- mum attainment. Probability of Survival to Age 5 • Learning-adjusted Years of School. Factoring in what children actually learn, expected years of school is only 8.7 years. .85 .9 .95 1 • Adult Survival Rate. Across Bulgaria, 87 percent of 15-year olds will sur- vive until age 60. This statistic is a proxy for the range of health risks that a child born today would experience as an adult under current condi- Expected Years of School tions. 4 6 8 10 12 14 • Healthy Growth (Not Stunted Rate). 93 out of 100 children are not stunted. 7 out of 100 children are stunted, and so are at risk of cogni- tive and physical limitations that can last a lifetime. Harmonized Test Scores DIFFERENCES IN HCI ACROSS GENDER AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC GROUPS 300 400 500 625 In Bulgaria, the HCI for girls is higher than for boys. Table 1 shows gender disaggregation for each of the HCI components. Learning-adjusted Years of School In Bulgaria, there are not sufficient data to disaggregate HCI by socio- economic groups. 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Adult Survival Rate Table 1. HCI by Gender and Socio-economic Group .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 Component Boys Girls Overall HCI 0.60 0.63 0.61 Fraction of Children Under 5 Not Stunted Survival to Age 5 0.99 0.99 0.99 Expected Years of School 12.4 12.2 12.3 .4 .6 .8 1 Harmonized Test Scores 432 451 441 Learning-adjusted Years of School 8.6 8.8 8.7 Note: Adult Survival Rate 0.82 0.92 0.87 - Large circle represents Bulgaria in 2020 Not Stunted Rate 0.93 0.93 0.93 - Diamond represents Bulgaria in 2010 - Small circles represent other countries HCI Ratio (richest / poorest 20 percent) - - Lines and color of circles indicate quartiles of the distribution For more on socioeconomic disaggregated HCI, please visit https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/human-capital/brief/ insights-from-disaggregating-the-human-capital-index PROTECT AND INVEST in people Human Capital Project - October 2020 The outlook for the next generation has been improving in most countries in Europe & Central Asia. Efforts are being made to protect human capital gains against setbacks and accelerate progress for all. The challenges unleashed by COVID-19 require an even stronger policy response, including greater use of technology to improve service delivery and enhanced social assistance programs, to ensure that people receive quality education and health care. DOMESTIC RESOURCE UTILIZATION AND MOBILIZATION • Social Safety Net Coverage. In Bulgaria, 58 percent (2007) of the poor- est quintile is covered by social safety nets. This is higher than both the • Health Spending. Bulgaria spends 4.2 percent (2017) of its GDP in pub- average for its region (46%) and the average for its income group (57%). lic spending on health. This is lower than the average for its region (4.9%) but higher than the average for its income group (4%). 13 per- • Human Capital Utilization. In Bulgaria, 68 percent (2018) of the cent (2010) of the population incurs catastrophic health expenditure working-age population is employed. This is higher than both the av- measured as out-of-pocket spending exceeding 10% of household con- erage for its region (65%) and the average for its income group (57%). sumption or income. • Education Spending. Bulgaria spends 4.1 percent (2013) of its GDP in government education spending. This is lower than both the regional Figure 2. Complementary Indicators average (4.6%) and the average for its income group (4.7%). Percent Not in Learning Poverty • Social Assistance Spending. Bulgaria spends 1.0 percent (2017) of its GDP on social assistance. This is lower than both the regional average (1.8%) and the average for its income group (1.5%). 0 20 40 60 80 100 • Government Revenue. General government revenue in Bulgaria is 35.1 Quality-adjusted Years of Higher Education percent (2018) of GDP. This is lower than the average for its region (38.1%) but higher than the average for its income group (30.6%). 0 .5 1 1.5 2 COMPLEMENTARY INDICATORS Percent of Adults Who Are Not Hypertensive • Learning Poverty. In Bulgaria, 12 percent (2016) of 10-year-olds cannot read and understand a simple text by the end of primary school. This is higher than the average for its region (11%) but lower than the average 50 60 70 80 90 100 for its income group (38%). • Pre-primary Gross Enrollment. In Bulgaria, the gross enrollment ratio Percent of Adults Who Are Not Diabetic in pre-primary education is 77 percent (2017). This is lower than the average for its region (85%) but higher than the average for its income group (63%). 50 60 70 80 90 100 • Quality-adjusted Years of Higher Education. In Bulgaria, about 32 per- Social Safety Net Coverage in the Poorest Quintile cent (2017) of adults ages 30-34 have a tertiary degree. A child born to- day can expect to complete 1.1 years of higher education. Factoring in the quality of higher education, expected years of higher education is 0 20 40 60 80 100 only 0.9 years. • NCD Deaths. In Bulgaria, the probability of dying between ages 30 and Human Capital Utilization 70 from cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, or chronic respiratory diseases is 24 percent (2016). This is higher than both the average for its 0 20 40 60 80 100 region (17%) and the average for its income group (20%). • Health Risk Factors. In Bulgaria 14 percent of adults are obese, 35 per- Note: cent are smokers, and 17 percent are heavy drinkers. - Large circle represents Bulgaria - Small circles represent other countries • Hypertension. In Bulgaria, 36 percent (2015) of the population age 18 - Lines and color of circles indicate quartiles of the distribution and older has hypertension. This is higher than both the average for its region (29%) and the average for its income group (23%). • Diabetes. In Bulgaria, 6 percent (2019) of the population ages 20-79 has This brief is based on the most recent data available from the Human type 1 or type 2 diabetes. This is similar to the average for its region (6%) Capital Project, World Development Indicators, Atlas of Social Protec- but lower than the average for its income group (10%). tion Indicators of Resilience and Equity (ASPIRE), UNESCO Institute for Statistics, WHO Global Health Observatory and Global Health Expendi- • Universal Health Coverage (UHC) Index. The index, ranging from 0 to ture Database, IMF World Economic Outlook, selected national sources 100, measures coverage of essential health services based on tracer in- and World Bank staff estimates. terventions. In Bulgaria, the UHC Index score is 66 (2017). This is lower than both the average for its region (75) and the average for its income For more information on the definition of indicators and data sources, group (69). please visit: www.worldbank.org/humancapital PROTECT AND INVEST in people Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 2. Proposal for Further Questions to Inform Future Interactions with Comparator Countries ANNEX 2 PROPOSAL FOR FURTHER QUESTIONS TO INFORM FUTURE INTERACTIONS OF MOES WITH COMPARATOR COUNTRIES REPRESENTATIVES This annex outlines a list of suggested relevant questions for further interactions with representatives from the education authorities of the comparator countries. MOES can use this list to inform their own selection of more detailed questions that fit priorities and preferences. This list presents questions identified by (a) MOES during a July 2, 2020 workshop, (b) the World Bank team in the process of analysis and (c) topics presented in the case studies of the three comparator countries – Estonia, the Czech Republic and Slovenia, that may benefit from further feedback and insight. Some of these questions have been tested and used in the interviews with representatives from the comparator countries. CONTENTS POLICY STRATEGIES (GENERAL) .............................................................................................................. 1 SPECIFIC QUESTIONS............................................................................................................................... 2 B. Initial teacher education (ITE) ........................................................................................................ 2 C. Teachers’ careers ............................................................................................................................ 3 D. Continuing professional development ........................................................................................... 4 E. School principals ............................................................................................................................. 5 F. Schools as learning organizations ................................................................................................... 6 POLICY STRATEGIES (GENERAL) A1. What types of strategic efforts, stakeholder engagements, communications/outreach efforts, etc. were needed? A2. What challenges and political and institutional constraints needed to be addressed? A3. What pre-conditions or enabling conditions were in place to ensure success? A4. What were the main obstacles for successful teacher policies in #yourcountry? And what did the ministry of education (MoE) do to overcome these obstacles? A5. What do you think were the main challenges for effective teacher policies in the last 5 years? And how did the MoE deal with these challenges? 1 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 2. Proposal for Further Questions to Inform Future Interactions with Comparator Countries A6. How were standards and competence models internalized by teachers? What strategy was used with old-school teachers (teachers with long tenure and ITE acquired in socialist style programs)? Was CPD working to change attitudes and mindsets? A7. What is the MoE role in the formation of ITE or CPD programs to ensure support for national priorities related to student outcomes? A8. How was formative assessment of teachers and school managers introduced, developed and utilized? Was the focus on measuring and evaluating, or on supporting schools (including tools)? A9. How has #yourcountry made the transition from administrative/managerial leadership of principals to instructional leadership? A10. Country specific questions: a. Estonia: ● How did you realize a culture in schools where school principals and teachers learn and professionalize? Was the culture always open and focused on learning and developing? What were the main challenges in this? Do all teachers and principals use the evaluation instruments? ● How important is the competence model in teacher policies? What strategies were used in the development and implementation of the competence model? b. Czech Republic: ● How important are the teacher standards and the levels in teacher policies? What strategies were used in the development and implementation of the standards (and levels)? SPECIFIC QUESTIONS B. INITIAL TEACHER EDUCATION (ITE) B1. Are there admission exams for ITE in #yourcountry? Are the admission exams requirements lower or higher compared to other specialties? B2. What are the shares of different subjects with ITE programs: a. related to pedagogy itself, b. related to the subject (math, biology, etc.) c. related to practice, d. related to general courses? 2 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 2. Proposal for Further Questions to Inform Future Interactions with Comparator Countries B3. How is accreditation of ITE and CPD programs linked with teacher competence models and professional standards? B4: Country specific questions: a. Slovenia: ● Is the state professional examination at the end of ITE unified and standardized? Or do the institutions decide on the content and assessment methods? What are the elements of this exam? b. Czech Republic: ● How large Is the in-school-placement in the ITE programs? Is it two weeks (OECD, 2016) or six to twelve weeks (IEA, 2020). Or did it change over time? ● Is the state professional examination at the end of ITE unified and standardized? Or do the institutions decide on the content and assessment methods? What are the elements of this exam? C. TEACHERS’ CAREERS C1. What criteria are most commonly used by schools for promotion of teachers? Are these: a. experience; b. meeting standards; c. CPD requirements (in days or programs); d. observations of lessons; e. student results. C2. What constitutes teacher promotion? Is this a change in roles? Are these additional responsibilities with reduced teaching hours? C3. What are the benefits of career steps for teachers? How large is the salary increase and are there other benefits (prestige, further career options)? C4. How do schools with a disadvantaged student population attract good teachers? Do they offer full time contracts and a combination of subjects (even without qualifications in these subjects? C5. Country specific questions: a. Estonia: ● What is the value of effectiveness of performance in considering compensation increase and how is it measured/by whom? 3 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 2. Proposal for Further Questions to Inform Future Interactions with Comparator Countries ● How was the competence model developed? Was the EU framework a starting point? Was it linked with other policies beyond teacher workforce? D. CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT D1. How is the quality of CPD training guaranteed to meet teachers` needs? a. How are the needs, topics and providers of CPD for individual teachers selected? b. Do teachers have an individual plan for CPD? c. Is there a relation between CPD and the performance of teachers? If so, how is this performance measured? d. Are there individual teacher development plans? Are these based on teacher performance? And are these done annually? D2. What is the distribution of time/quantity of: a. in-house CPD and external trainings; b. individual versus team training; c. national versus tailored programs. D3. Who are the providers of professional development programs for teachers? a. Who are the providers of CPD for teachers? b. Is there independent choice of provider or training? c. Do education authorities or school principals influence the content of the qualification programs/courses/trainings? D4. How do you support schools to do quality CPD planning, monitoring and evaluation? And are the effects of CPD in terms of teacher performance evaluated at schools? And if so, how is this done? D5. Country specific questions: a. Estonia: ● How is the quality management of the large teacher development programs organized? ● Are there differences between the national, school level and teacher level decisions on CPD? Are there different practices/topics/approaches? ● What is the experience with the teacher self-assessment tool? What were the challenges with the introduction of this tool? Is there a website where an example of this tool can be seen? 4 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 2. Proposal for Further Questions to Inform Future Interactions with Comparator Countries b. Slovenia: ● What do teachers think of professional development programs on the weekends or in the evenings? Are teachers compensated for these programs? ● Are CPD activities organized during non-teaching hours/days held outside or within school premises? c. Czech Republic: ● What strategies were used to get such a high percentage of induction programs and mentoring of novice teachers in the Czech Republic? How is this implemented without making it compulsory? ● Are the key competences and levels for teachers based in the Education Act? If not, is there a legal basis for the competences? And what strategy was used to introduces the competence levels? ● The teacher unions are involved in the development plans of schools in the Czech Republic. How is this working at schools? Is this a sustainable approach? E. SCHOOL PRINCIPALS E1. Are there specific requirements on formal education for school principals in your country? Do principals have to pass relevant MA programs (Management in Education, Leadership in Education, Administration in Education, etc.) before or after appointment? E2. What are the effective elements of principal training programs in your country? What are the characteristics of the institutions that deliver such training? E3. Are there leadership competences defined in #yourcountry? How are principal competences defined and measured (where applicable)? E4. What policies/programs are in place to hold principals accountable for student learning outcomes? And if so, what policies/programs are in place for this accountability? E5. Is continuing professional development of school leadership (principals and deputies) also based on formative feedback and appraisal systems like for teachers? E6. Country specific questions: a. Estonia: ● How does the assessment system for school leaders work? What elements are assessed and by whom? Does it also take into account internal assessment involving the teaching staff participating? ● What is the period of appointment and grounds for extension of contract of principals? Do principals serve for life? What if student performance is low in their school? 5 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 2. Proposal for Further Questions to Inform Future Interactions with Comparator Countries ● How do principals distribute leadership functions in Estonia where this appears to be most common as practice (comparison between the 3 comparators)? b. Slovenia: ● How important is the National School for Leadership in Education in Slovenia? What would it take to create something similar in Bulgaria? c. Czech Republic: ● Is it correct that there are no national CPD programs in the Czech Republic? Is there a plan to organize specific CPD programs in the future? ● There is an accreditation system for ITE programs, is that correct? However, the OECD concludes that the consistency of the quality of initial teacher education is a challenge for the country because of the large differs between the educational institutes offering the ITE programs for teachers (OECD, 2016a). Does this mean that the accreditation system has not been effective? F. SCHOOLS AS LEARNING ORGANIZATIONS F1. Feedback and appraisal system: a. Who gives the teachers feedback on their performance? Are these the peers, principals or local authorities? What standards and instruments do they use? F2. How are principals assessed and evaluated? And do external school evaluations evaluate school principals? If so, how? F3. Country specific questions: a. Estonia: ● How important is the school self-evaluation? How do you stimulate schools to be reflective? And how do you prevent these self-evaluations to be only good on paper, to be full of window dressing? And are the self-evaluations only for the schools, or are these also used by the authorities and/or the public? b. Slovenia: ● MoE invested in team learning and collaboration. How is this organized? And how is it functioning in schools? What is the difference with team training activities? ● How do you organize that research projects of teachers (done at universities) are not only beneficial for the teacher’s school, but for all schools in the country? ● What types of innovation were part of the program? How important was the pilot? And is it monitored by indicators? If so, what indicators? Is there an impact evaluation of this program? 6 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 3 PROGRAM PROPOSAL: INVESTMENT IN A LONGITUDINAL STUDY ON LEARNING AND LIFE-LONG LEARNING OUTCOMES. THE FLOW OF STUDENTS FROM THE “SCHOOL READINESS” COHORT (SPRINGBOARD FOR SCHOOL READINESS PROGRAM) IN EDUCATION. THE COLORS INDICATE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF EDUCATION 2014- 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2019- 2020- 2021- 2022- 2023- 2024- 2025- 2026- 2027- 2028- 2029- 2030- 2031- 2032- 2033- 2034- 2035- 2036- Born Age 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 2013 1 1 2012 2 144 1 Kindergarten 2011 3 1788 144 1 2010 4 1862 1788 144 1 2009 5 1306 1862 1788 144 1 Preschool 2008 6 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 Readiness Assessment X 1st 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 grade 7 2nd 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 grade 8 Primary school 3rd 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 grade 9 4th 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 grade 10 TIMSS 4th Grade X X External assessment after 4th X X X X X X 5th 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 grade 11 Lower 6th Secondary 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 grade 12 school 7th 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 grade 13 External assessment after 7th X X X X X X 8th Upper 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 grade 14 secondary 9th education 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 grade 15 PISA (at the end of 9th grade) X X X 10th 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 grade 16 Upper 11th secondary 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 grade 17 education 12th 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 grade 18 DZI X X X X X X 19 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 20 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 Higher 21 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 Education 22 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 23 71 1306 1862 1788 144 1 Labour Market Outcomes X X X X X X Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 4. Leadership and Teacher Competences ANNEX 4 LEADERSHIP AND TEACHER COMPETENCES Table 1. Pedagogical Competences and KSAs for Principals and Deputy Principals Defined in professional profiles in Ordinance No. 15, 2019 (Annex 3 and 4) Principals Deputy Principals 1. Organizes a quality educational process in view 1. Has the pedagogical and psychological of the specific age and socio-cultural knowledge and skills for organizing and characteristics of the children and students. conducting a quality educational process in view of the specific age and socio-cultural characteristics of the children and students. 2. Is familiar with and implements strategic and 4. Is familiar with and implements strategic and programmatic document for setting priorities programmatic documents for setting priorities related to the development of the educational related to the development of the educational institution. institution. 3. Knows and applies the literary language norms. 2. Knows and applies the literary language norms. 4. Manages processes and resources related to the 6. Has the knowledge and skills for managing personal development, cultural diversity and resources and processes, related to civic inclusion of children and students with special education, personal development, cultural learning needs, children with distinct talents and diversity, educational integration of children children at risk. and students from ethnic minorities, inclusion of children and students with special educational needs, children with distinct talents, children at risk, etc. 5. Is familiar with and implements digital 5. Is familiar and applies effectively digital technologies effectively in the educational process. technologies in the educational process to effectively assist in the management of the institution's activities. 6. Is familiar with innovative educational 3. Is familiar with and applies educational technologies, and teaching and assessment technologies, methods and techniques of techniques and methods applicable in the teaching, assessment and support. educational process. 7. Applies the competence-based approach in 8. Applies the competence-based approach in his/her work related to the acquisition of key his/her work related to the acquisition of key competences by students, in accordance with Art. competences by students, in accordance with 77, paragraph 1 of the Pre-School and School Art. 77, paragraph 1 of the Pre-School and Education Act. School Education Act 7. Has theoretical knowledge of the subject(s)/curricula, including in respect of the latest achievements, and keeps abreast of developments in the specific scientific field. Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 4. Leadership and Teacher Competences Table 2. Managerial Competence Themes and KSAs for Principals and Deputy Principals Defined in professional profiles in Ordinance No. 15, 2019 (Annex 3 and 4) Theme Principals Deputy Principals 1.1. Knows and implements the 1.1. Knows and applies the regulations regulations in the areas of: in the areas of labor law and social 1.1.1. labor law and social insurance insurance, the functions of state 1.1.2. the functions of state institutions institutions and local administrations, and local administrations that are which are relevant to the educational relevant to the educational institution institution, pre-school and school 1.1.3. pre-school and school education education. 1.1.4. countering illegal, corrupt and 1.2. Counters illegal, corrupt and other Administrative other acts and does not allow actions that acts and does not allow actions that and legal undermine the prestige and reputation of undermine the prestige and reputation knowledge and the educational institution of the educational institution. culture 1.2. Is familiar with and applies innovative approaches in his/her managerial practice. 1.3. Knows the state policy in the area of pre-school and school education and implements strategic and programmatic documents for setting priorities related to the development of the institution. 2.1. Has the knowledge and skills for 2.1. Has the knowledge and skills for strategic and operational planning, strategic and organizational planning. effectively implements policies for the Assists the director/headmaster in the development of the institution. implementation of institutional policies. 2.2. Has quality management knowledge 2.2. Has quality management and skills. knowledge and skills, and analyzes 2.4. Analyzes the results of the results, outlines measures and makes institution's activities and outlines Strategic proposals for improving the quality of measures to improve the quality and school education. efficiency of work. improvement 2.3. Implements institutional policies in planning and the context of the broader framework of resource the socio-economic and cultural 2.3. Participates in the development management environment surrounding the educational and implementation of institutional, institution. municipal and regional education 2.5. Participates in the development and policies. implementation of national and regional education policies. 2.6. Develops, approves and implements programs, measures and mechanisms for the development of the educational institution. Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 4. Leadership and Teacher Competences 3.5. Identifies the directions, goals and 9. Makes proposals with regard to the tasks for the development of the directions, goals and tasks for the institution and draws up an adequate development of the educational plan for their implementation. institution and proposes a plan for their implementation. 3.6. Plans, allocates and manages human, 10. Participates in the planning, material, financial and information distribution and management of resources effectively. human, material, financial and information resources. 3.17. Draws up and manages the budget, 7. Manages resources. ensuring that the funds are spent lawfully, appropriately, effectively and transparently, and cooperates with stakeholders. 2.10. Establishes an optimal organizational structure for management and control of the compliance and implementation of the state education standards. 2.11. Creates conditions for the optimal 2.7. Takes part in standing and interim functioning of standing and interim committees. committees, teams for motivation and support of the personal development of children and students, the public oversight board, the board of trustees, Operational etc. delivery of 2.12. Approves the activities, procedures, 2.8. Takes part in the self-assessment school criteria, indicators and tools for the self- of the educational institution, in programs in assessment activity of the educational accordance with the state education compliance institution, in accordance with the state standard for quality management. with State education standard for quality control in Education the institutions. Standards 2.13. Creates conditions for the effective 4. Participation in the work of the work of the pedagogical council. pedagogical council. 2.14. Exercises systematic and effective 5. Controls the processes and activities control on the processes and activities in in the educational institution the educational institution and systematically and effectively and documents such actions in accordance draws up the documents in accordance with the requirements of the state with the requirements of the state education standard for quality education standards for quality management in the institutions, for the management, for information and information and documents, and for the documents, and for the financing of financial management and control system the institutions. of the institution. Distributed 3.1. Has leadership skills. Leadership and 3.2. has the skills to formulate and make 8. Has the skills to formulate and Collaborative decisions. propose decisions. Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 4. Leadership and Teacher Competences Decision- 3.3. Allocates responsibilities and Making delegates powers to achieve the goals of the educational institution. 3.4. Gives a clear idea of how the joint 13. Interacts with the members of the efforts of the team are expected to institutional community towards the contribute to achieving the goals set. development of a positive educational environment. 3.8. Is familiar with and applies 16. Is familiar with and applies information and communication information and communication technologies, as well as horizontal and technologies, as well as horizontal and vertical information flows to manage of vertical information flows to manage activities effectively. of activities effectively. 3.9. Creates an effective organization of 17. Contributes to building an efficient work in the educational institution. organization of work in the educational institution. 3.12. Creates an atmosphere of security, 18. Creates an atmosphere of security, trust, tolerance, cooperation and mutual trust, tolerance, cooperation and assistance within the team. mutual assistance in the team. 12. Follows ethical rules and standards in communication and does not allow discrimination. 2.5. Contributes to the establishment of conditions and implementation of 2.7. Establishes conditions for providing a measures for preventing and/or supportive environment and for curtailing acts of negative behavior compliance with the code of ethics for among children and students. working with children and the code of 2.6. Participates in the development, ethics of the institution. implementation and control of the institution's internal rules. 2.8. Ensures a safe and positive 2.4. Proposes decisions to ensure a School Climate educational environment. supportive, safe and positive educational environment. 2.9. Creates conditions for the inclusion and retention of the children and students in the kindergarten or school, respectively. 3.15. Creates conditions for stimulating the creative performances of children and students. 2.15. Establishes criteria for the degree of Teacher fulfillment of team responsibilities, Feedback, creating an internal system for Mentoring, monitoring, evaluation, feedback and CPD, Support decision-making for change. and Appraisal 3.10. Encourages educationalists to 3. Participation in educationalist participate in the institution's projects. appraisal committees. Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 4. Leadership and Teacher Competences 3.11. Supports the mentoring of young 6. Provides methodological and and newly appointed educationalists. pedagogical support to educationalists. 3.13. Encourages educationalists to 19. Encourages educationalists to devise, implement and promote develop, apply and promote innovations and good practices. innovations and good practices, to 3.16. Encourages the team to participate participate in projects for the in projects to support the development of development of the educational the educational institution. institution. 15. Is familiar with and applies approaches, methods and good practices in the area of human resource management and development. 3.14. Applies an individualized approach 20. Applies an individualized approach towards the team members and to educationalists and motivates them motivates them to pursue professional to pursue professional development in development in accordance with the line with the institution’s development institution's development strategy. strategy. 11. Organizes professional enhancement and career development training activities for educationalists. 14. Evaluates the professional development of educationalists, determines the need for qualification enhancement training and proposes ways for boosting the institutional capacity to the director/headmaster options. 3.18. Manages the infrastructure. Complies with the requirements for the maintenance of the building stock and adjacent areas, the requirements for the maintenance of the technical assets in accordance with the standard for the physical environment. 21. Enhances compliance with the Learning 3.19. Makes sure that material conditions requirements for the maintenance of environment are in place for the realization of the the building stock and adjacent areas and educational process by ensuring diverse and the requirements for the infrastructure technical and didactic means, equipped maintenance of technical and didactic and maintained functional classrooms, means. studies, workshops, laboratories, etc., according to the requirements of the state education standard for the physical environment. 3.20. Makes sure that a physical environment is in place with healthy and Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 4. Leadership and Teacher Competences safe conditions for education, upbringing, socialization and work. 3.21. Has the skills to manage 22. Has information and document information resources and implements management skills. the state education standard for Record keeping information and documents. 3.22. Controls and is responsible for the 23. Controls and is responsible for the proper keeping and storing of training proper keeping and storing of training and school records. and school records. Table 3. Social and Civic Competences and KSAs for Principals and Deputy Principals Defined in professional profiles in Ordinance No. 15, 2019 (Annex 3 and 4) Principals Deputy Principals 1. Recognizes and applies the linguistic and ethical 1. Recognizes and applies the linguistic and standards in communication in different contexts. ethical standards in communication. 2. Has presentation skills. 2. Has presentation skills. 3. Has the skills to establish a sustainable line of 3. Has the skills to establish a sustainable line of communication with all parties involved in the communication with all parties involved in the communication process. communication process. 4. Has negotiating and debating skills. 5. Has negotiating and debating skills. 5. Knows and applies the appropriate forms of 6. Knows and applies appropriate forms of conduct to ensure an efficient and constructive conduct to ensure an efficient and constructive teamwork. teamwork. 6. Exchanges information for the purpose of and 7. Exchanges information to achieve mutual until mutual understanding and coordination of understanding and coordination of activities. activities are reached. 7. Has conflict management skills. 8. Identifies aspects of agreement and 8. Identifies the aspects of agreement and disagreement and has conflict management disagreement. skills. 9. Fosters consensus-building attitudes when 9. Fosters consensus-building attitudes when innovative ideas are being introduced. innovative ideas are being introduced. 10. Establishes and supports good practices in a 10. Establishes good practices in a multicultural multicultural educational environment and does educational environment and does not allow not allow discrimination. discrimination. 11. Builds partnership relations and communicates 4. Builds partnership relations and effectively with parents. communicates effectively with parents. 12. Builds partnership relations through joint 11. Builds partnership relations with the board activities with the board of trustees, the public of trustees, the public oversight board, social oversight board, social partners, the institutions in partners, the institutions in the education the education system, the regional bodies of the system, the regional bodies of the executive, executive, the bodies of local self-government, the bodies of local self-government, higher NGOs, higher education schools, etc. to develop an education schools, institutions, NGOs, etc. to effective educational environment. develop an effective educational environment. Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 4. Leadership and Teacher Competences 13. Collaborates with control bodies and 12. Assists control bodies and institutions in the institutions in the execution of control and execution of control and inspection actions. inspection actions. 14. Identifies his/her own needs and defines goals 13. Identifies his/her own further qualification targeted on his/her own continuing professional needs, sets and achieves goals targeted on development. his/her continuing professional development. Table 4. Pedagogical Competences and KSAs for Teachers Defined in professional profiles in Ordinance No. 15, 2019 (Annex 1) Theme Teachers ITE (pedagogical, 1.1. Possesses theoretical knowledge of the subject he/she teaches, and in the psychological, fields of pedagogy, psychology, methodology and special subjects, including methodological, those related to the latest achievements and follows developments. subject-specific 1.2. Applies the competence-based approach in his/her work related to the education) acquisition of key competences by students, in accordance with Art. 77, paragraph 1 of the Pre-School and School Education Act. 1.3. Has knowledge of innovative education technology, and teaching and assessment techniques and methods applicable in the field of general education, subject-specific or vocational training module which he/she teaches. 1.4. Understands the cognitive, emotional and physical development of various age groups of children and students and gears teaching in accordance with their individual needs. 1.5. Knows and applies the literary language norms of the modern Bulgarian language. 1.6. Understands and applies methods for working in multicultural environment, for supporting and motivating children and students with special educational needs, with chronic illnesses, with learning disabilities or at risk, as well as those with distinct talents. 1.7. Knows the capabilities of ICT and the mechanisms for their integration and application in the educational process. 1.8. Knows techniques and ways for developing children and students' communication skills, critical and constructive thinking to allow them to search effectively, retrieve, select and determine the usefulness of information from various sources. 1.9. Recognizes and adheres to the legally established norms, pertaining to his/her professional rights, obligations and employment relationship. 1.10. Recognizes and applies the code of conduct for working with children and the code of ethics of the educational community, knows the rights of children, complies with the rules of professional ethics, as well as with the requirements for confidentiality with regard to children/students. Planning of 2.1. Knows the state educational standards and plans his/her teaching activities lessons and accordingly, by developing an annual thematic allocation plan. pedagogical 2.2. Defines clear educational goals, designs techniques for teaching and situations motivating children/students, for establishing interdisciplinary and cross- disciplinary links, and projects the results to be expected. Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 4. Leadership and Teacher Competences 2.3. Knows the specific needs of each child/student and maps out actions for individual work and support. 2.4. Has knowledge and skills to work with children/students with special educational needs, at risk, with chronic illnesses or with distinct talents. 2.5. Knows how to and plans the use of innovative teaching methods and methods for assessing student outcomes, based on collaboration to achieve better results. Organizing and 3.1. Takes into account the characteristics of children/students in the managing the group/class. educational 3.2. Selects and applies innovative methods and uses appropriate tools and process materials for self-preparation and in the implementation of educational activities. 3.3. Provides opportunities for practicing and applying the acquired knowledge, for developing the creative thinking and motivation for independent activity, as well as for receiving feedback. 3.4. Applies information and communication technologies in his/her work and encourages children/students to use them as well. 3.5. Promotes the acquisition of key competences. 3.6. Encourages and guides the acquisition of knowledge, the development of skills and a frame of mind for success in children/students, for independent living, for interpersonal and cross-cultural communication, for decision-making, empathy, responsibility for their own actions, for critical and creative thinking, etc. 3.7. Assists in the upbringing, development and manifestation of the personal potential of each child/student. 3.8. Ensures a positive educational environment, geared to the individual needs of children/students, providing support aimed at improving their outcomes. 3.9. Understands and applies the requirements for safe learning, upbringing and work, and provides a secure and safe environment for children/students, including for working on the Internet. 3.10. Uses skillfully presentation techniques and provides support for the development of student presentation skills. 3.11. Keeps and stores teaching and school documentation. Assessing 4.1. Knows the state educational standards for evaluation of student learning children/students` outcomes and for pre-school education, and skillfully invents and applies progress effective tools for reviewing and assessing (diagnosing) children's/students' achievements, and for determining the level of mastery of content knowledge and acquisition of skills of each child or student. 4.2. Can use appropriate methods, means and approaches (incl. innovative) to promote the progress and achievements of children or students and to define criteria and indicators for assessing the knowledge and skills of students, and then acquaint both the class/group, as well as every individual student/child with them. 4.3. Has skills and provides objective and timely information about the individual development and results achieved by the child/student, informs the parents Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 4. Leadership and Teacher Competences about them and identifies measures for additional support, counseling and correction, using feedback in a constructive manner to improve his/her teaching work. 4.4. Nurtures self-assessment, self-criticism and self-improvement skills in children/students. Managing of the 5.1. Has the skills to organize, coordinate and control activities during teaching, processes in maintains the necessary discipline and working atmosphere in the class/group, individual class aims to achieve the planned results, works with all groups (distinguished and groups or forms advanced, with learning disabilities, with knowledge gaps, etc.), reviews the results achieved. Can direct a group/class by sharing the care and responsibility for the children/students, developing teamwork skills, motivating them to participate in the planned activities and to study independently, fostering a spirit of tolerance and promoting active citizenship. 5.2. Understands and applies constructive cooperative approaches to guide students towards autonomous learning through the acquisition of key skills, rather than mechanical memorizing. 5.3. Responds to the specific needs of children/students, applies a differentiated teaching approach to support effective learning. 5.4. Has the knowledge and skills to work in a heterogeneous environment and promotes the social integration of children/students with disabilities, by initiating and organizing various forms of interaction, building relationships, based on mutual trust and respect. 5.5. Knows and applies techniques for prevention and getting through conflict situations, selects methods and approaches designed to nurture empathy, commitment, solidarity, takes into consideration personal and value-based differences between people as a basis for mutual understanding. 5.6. Recognizes the causes and factors of aggressive, reserved and anti-social behavior, and applies the counteraction and response methods in every specific situation. 5.7. Promotes the protection of the physical and technical assets and teaches responsibility to children and students. 5.8. Has the skills to organize and manage the group or class, supports the development of internal rules and encourages adhering to them. 5.9. Encourages students to participate in the forms of student self-government and in the discussion in resolving issues affecting school life and the school community, incl. the school syllabus. Table 5. Social and Civic Competences and KSAs for Teachers Defined in professional profiles in Ordinance No. 15, 2019 (Annex 2) Theme Teachers Teamwork 1.1. Partners with pedagogical specialists and takes part in activities related to the development of the strategy for development of the educational institution, in updating and implementing specific activities and tasks. 1.2. Establishes and maintains constructive professional relationships. 1.3. Provides methodological and organizational support to newly appointed teachers/counselors and/or performs mentoring functions for trainee-teachers. Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 4. Leadership and Teacher Competences 1.4. Interacts with other pedagogical specialists to ensure equal educational opportunities in the integration of children/students. Working with 2.1. Promotes the involvement of parents in achieving educational goals. parents and other 2.2. Supports and encourages the efforts of parents of children/students with stakeholders special educational needs, with learning disabilities or of disadvantaged children/students in coping with various social problems. 2.3. Organizes and conducts teacher-parents meetings, provides timely and accurate information about the performance of the children/students in terms of progress, absences, etc. 2.4. Participates in the implementation of joint initiatives and projects of the institution with the public oversight board, the board of trustees and other partner organizations. Continuing Identifies his/her own needs for further training, sets and achieves goals aimed professional at his/her continuous professional development. development Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data ANNEX 5 TEACHING WORKFORCE BASIC STATISTICS AND DATA Contents NATIONAL LEVEL – TEACHING WORKFORCE INDICATORS ..................................................................... 3 Teachers by age group in schools and kindergartens (2005-2018) .................................................... 3 Teachers below 35 years in schools and kindergartens (2018) .......................................................... 4 Teachers by ITE level in schools and kindergartens (2005-2018)....................................................... 5 Teachers with ITE below BA in schools and kindergartens (2005-2018)............................................ 6 Teachers with ITE below BA in kindergartens by region (2005-2018) ............................................... 7 Teachers with ITE below BA in schools by region (2005-2018) .......................................................... 8 Teachers with ITE below BA by type of educational institution (2005-2018) .................................... 9 Personnel with management functions in schools and kindergartens by region (2005-2018) ....... 11 Teachers in schools and kindergartens by professional qualification degree (2005-2018) ............. 15 STR and class size distribution at the municipal level ...................................................................... 16 REGIONAL LEVEL – TEACHING WORKFORCE INDICATORS.................................................................... 23 Region BLAGOEVGRAD – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ...................................................... 23 Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018)........................................ 23 Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) .......................... 24 Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) ................................ 25 Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) .............................. 26 Region BURGAS – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ................................................................. 27 Region DOBRICH – teaching workforce indicators (2018)................................................................ 31 Region GABROVO – teaching workforce indicators (2018) .............................................................. 35 Region HASKOVO – teaching workforce indicators (2018) .............................................................. 38 Region KARDZHALI – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ............................................................ 42 Region KYUSTENDIL – teaching workforce indicators (2018)........................................................... 46 Region LOVECH – teaching workforce indicators (2018).................................................................. 50 Region MONTANA – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ............................................................. 54 Region PAZARDZHIK – teaching workforce indicators (2018) .......................................................... 58 Region PERNIK – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ................................................................... 62 Region PLEVEN – teaching workforce indicators (2018) .................................................................. 66 Region PLOVDIV – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ................................................................ 70 1 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region RAZGRAD – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ............................................................... 74 Region RUSE – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ...................................................................... 78 Region SHUMEN – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ................................................................ 82 Region SILISTRA – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ................................................................. 86 Region SLIVEN – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ................................................................... 90 Region SMOLYAN – teaching workforce indicators (2018) .............................................................. 93 Region SOFIA – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ..................................................................... 97 Region SOFIA CITY – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ........................................................... 104 Region STARA ZAGORA – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ................................................... 106 Region TARGOVISHTE – teaching workforce indicators (2018)...................................................... 110 Region VARNA – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ................................................................. 113 Region VELIKO TARNOVO – teaching workforce indicators (2018)................................................ 117 Region VIDIN – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ................................................................... 121 Region VRATSA – teaching workforce indicators (2018) ................................................................ 125 Region YAMBOL – teaching workforce indicators (2018)............................................................... 129 ANONYMIZED TEACHER LEVEL DATA ANALYSIS POTENTIAL AND PROPOSED KEY TEACHING WORKFORCE AND POLICY QUESTIONS ............................................................................................... 132 2 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data NATIONAL LEVEL – TEACHING WORKFORCE INDICATORS Teachers by age group in schools and kindergartens (2005-2018) 3 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers below 35 years in schools and kindergartens (2018) 4 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers by ITE level in schools and kindergartens (2005-2018) 5 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers with ITE below BA in schools and kindergartens (2005-2018) 6 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers with ITE below BA in kindergartens by region (2005-2018) 7 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers with ITE below BA in schools by region (2005-2018) 8 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers with ITE below BA by type of educational institution (2005-2018) 9 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data 10 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Personnel with management functions in schools and kindergartens by region (2005-2018) 11 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data 12 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data 13 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data 14 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in schools and kindergartens by professional qualification degree (2005-2018) 15 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Student teacher ratio and class size distribution at municipal level (2018) Municipality STR Class Size Aitos 11.74131 22.49402 Aksakovo 9.686047 20.44758 Alfatar 5.619048 16.85714 Anton 5.9375 13.57143 Antonovo 6.395833 12.53958 Apriltci 6.653846 14.41667 Ardino 7.024096 13.89157 Asenovgrad 11.22624 22.19252 Avren 7.577236 13.76258 Balchik 9.151724 20.15662 Banite 5.909091 12.96281 Bansko 9.33557 22.09057 Batak 7.849057 14.28645 Belene 7.675676 17.55135 Belica 9.68504 18.70013 Belogradchik 11.68 20.01625 Beloslav 8.990476 21.46717 Belovo 8.220588 18.32481 Berkovitca 8.1 18.07528 Biala Slatina 11.21774 21.90981 Blagoevgrad 10.44828 23.62778 Boboshevo 5.818182 10.66667 Bobov dol 7.632353 17.51166 Bodzurishte 10.45313 21.51215 Bolyarovo 8.866667 15.5 Borino 5.678571 11.35714 Borovan 8.784616 19.97934 Borovo 6.742857 13.27857 Botevgrad 11.86774 23.06342 Boychinovtci 8.988764 18.95774 Boynitsa 6.333333 10.85714 Bracigovo 8.09375 16.27619 Bratia Daskalovi 8.122808 14.39035 Bregovo 7.133333 17.83333 Breznik 8.714286 18.47583 Brezovo 8.328767 17.28896 Brusartsi 7.512195 12.92404 16 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Burgas 11.5221 24.1365 Byala 11.36364 22.55171 Byala 7.583333 19.34691 Chavdar 5 8.75 Chelopech 8.540541 17.90135 Chepelare 5.91 14.96667 Chernooshene 7 14.81885 Cherven bryag 8.713355 19.66479 Chiprovtci 6 10 Chirpan 9.744856 21.20003 Chuprene 5.470588 10.28235 Dalgopol 8.769231 18.48162 Devin 7.570313 17.56012 Devnya 10.37097 20.63719 Dimitrovgrad 10.57107 21.95838 Dimovo 8.903226 15.30645 Dobrich 10.56142 21.90093 Dobrichka 7.842466 15.10747 Dolna banya 10.92593 21.83029 Dolna Mitropolia 8.173333 17.4916 Dolni Chiflik 10.46524 19.33743 Dolni Dabnik 9.087301 17.34027 Dospat 7 14.05672 Dragoman 9.354838 16.11111 Dryanovo 10.41071 22.37347 Dulovo 9.702797 19.86549 Dupnitca 10.48276 21.95017 Dve Mogili 9.557143 18.98968 Dzhebel 8.988372 19.1238 Elena 8.326316 18.36436 Elhovo 10.68421 22.73191 Elin Pelin 9.214286 18.32045 Etropole 8.858065 20.05627 Gabrovo 10.68493 23.18881 Galabovo 11.42241 20.84492 Garmen 8.797979 18.83465 General Toshevo 7.755245 17.87148 Georgi Damianovo 6.263158 13.97105 Glavinitca 8.078652 16.47111 Godech 9.1 21.41176 17 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Gorna Malina 8.63077 17.11923 Gorna Oriahovitza 10.32759 20.94986 Gotse Delchev 10.20913 21.5158 Gramada 4.166667 7.142857 Gulianci 9.590909 19.16092 Gurkovo 13.02326 19.93314 Hadzhidimovo 7.820513 16.31845 Hajredin 8.299999 18.84792 Harmanly 10.75 21.22478 Haskovo 11.43611 22.60775 Hisarya 8.541666 15.63991 Hitrino 6.894737 17.50239 Ihtiman 14.75287 23.85174 Iskar 9.388889 19.162 Isperih 9.469298 19.79526 Ivailovgrad 7.029851 17.47761 Ivanovo 5.529412 10.44328 Kaloyanovo 6.623376 14.96939 Kameno 8.287499 17.475 Kaolinovo 8.378151 18.05022 Kardzhali 10.16117 20.93039 Karlovo 10.54227 23.2212 Karnobat 11.65217 23.23238 Kaspichan 7.551282 15.34793 Kavarna 8.618055 19.15779 Kaynardza 9.727273 21.17839 Kazanlak 11.04514 22.28115 Kirkovo 8.508671 16.89914 Kneja 10.63687 21.57078 Kocherinovo 8.965517 20 Koprivshtitca 11.1 22.2 Kostenetz 10.30252 18.82872 Kostinbrod 9.041667 19.64165 Kotel 8.847222 19.12039 Kovachevci 3.142857 5.5 Kozloduy 10.80717 21.83621 Kresna 8.972973 18.44444 Krichim 9.5 20.66757 Krivodol 9.217391 18.57355 Krumovgrad 9.115578 17.55555 18 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Krushari 7.533333 16.59274 Kubrat 8.385621 18.54998 Kuklen 10.03704 22.65826 Kula 7.965517 17.76923 Kyustendil 9.847656 21.91334 Laki 5.545455 10.16667 Lesichovo 8.333333 14.35347 Letnitca 11.9697 20.78947 Levski 8.916667 19.66435 Lom 10.29889 19.18196 Lovech 10.06544 21.26279 Loznitca 7.821782 16.56312 Lubimetc 11.83333 22.48478 Lukovit 12.15301 22.87356 Lyaskovetz 7.758242 20.03724 Madan 7.55 16.50176 Madzarovo 8.380953 17.6 Maglij 10.56881 19.08942 Makresh 3.2 8 Malko Tarnovo 9.115385 19.75 Maritza 7.970339 17.03827 Medkovets 7.893617 17.15957 Mezdra 8.544444 19.12282 Mineralni bany 8.891891 20.71686 Mirkovo 6.529412 15.85714 Mizia 7.55 14.30238 Momchilgrad 8.320755 16.80694 Montana 10.88806 22.98567 Nedelino 7.836735 18.04225 Nesebar 11.17453 20.59287 Nevestino 11 23.375 Nikola Kozlevo 7.912088 17.98559 Nikolaevo 12.25806 18.82845 Nikopol 9.156863 17.98039 Nova Zagora 10.65116 20.72029 Novi Pazar 8.737864 19.66196 Novo selo 8.142858 14.25 Omurtag 9.335106 20.22034 Opaka 7.56 16.49714 Opan 7 13.22222 19 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Oryahovo 9.146068 20.27983 Panagurishte 9.822116 21.06165 Parvomay 8.657371 17.83518 Pavel banya 8.866667 16.04136 Pavlikeni 8.698925 18.61377 Pazaedzik 10.3628 21.76145 Pernik 10.41619 21.59964 Perushtica 10.94 21.05491 Peshtera 10.13208 21.10278 Petrich 10.04167 21.38838 Pirdop 10.22826 20.07126 Pleven 10.13149 21.46428 Plovdiv 10.84116 22.86679 Polsky Trambesh 10.52 19.62902 Pomorie 9.223107 19.79828 Popovo 9.225925 19.88308 Pordim 6.753425 18.68797 Pravetc 8.546391 21.37873 Primorsko 10.41463 18.71789 Provadia 9.706349 20.32466 Radnevo 9.907515 21.15767 Radomir 9.585526 19.66064 Rakitovo 8.900585 19.69643 Rakovski 12.12617 21.45831 Razgrad 10.61709 21.3651 Razlog 10.13439 21.51417 Rila 8.545455 13.42857 Rodopi 6.890476 15.55057 Roman 7.266667 17.91269 Rudozem 7.560976 19.2571 Ruen 9.128289 17.61107 Ruse 10.07887 21.6329 Ruzhintsi 9.137255 16.00163 Sadovo 9.613793 20.6023 Saedinenie 10.3913 21.76829 Samokov 10.33333 21.98237 Samuil 9.305085 17.61229 Sandanski 9.894349 21.34317 Sarnitza 7.442857 14.5256 Satovcha 7.942708 16.2454 20 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Separeva banya 8.916667 23.77778 Septemvri 8.853557 19.2241 Sevlievo 10.43322 21.0006 Shabla 7.815789 16.65992 Shumen 11.13953 22.98055 Silistra 9.279022 22.65415 Simeonovgrad 12.24324 23.21757 Simitli 9.193548 20.29125 Sitovo 7.907407 19.79312 Sliven 11.76858 22.60546 Slivnica 10.35897 18.76648 Slivo pole 7.942857 17.8969 Smolyan 8.209164 19.73802 Smyadovo 7.222222 18.02205 Sofia 10.56839 22.09557 Sopot 9.867647 24.81023 Sozopol 10.6729 22.46071 Sredetz 11.86555 21.07868 Stamboliiski 10.14925 19.639 Stambolovo 7.71875 17.19231 Stara Zagora 10.77959 22.29159 Strajitza 8.302013 18.10427 Straldza 10.44737 20.45971 Strelcha 9.717949 19.22145 Strumyani 8.682927 18.73684 Suhindol 6.576923 15.54545 Sungurlare 9.366667 17.35342 Suvorovo 9.90625 19.98621 Svilengrad 11.31414 22.55954 Svishtov 9.169871 20.73836 Svoge 8.637427 16.70658 Targovishte 9.837663 20.44772 Tcenovo 5.793104 9.405172 Tervel 8.931973 17.70377 Teteven 8.666667 18.60886 Topolovgrad 11.31325 19.92932 Tran 9.310345 18 Treklyano 4.25 8.5 Triavna 7.050505 17.87023 Troyan 9.188552 19.65131 21 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Tundjza 7.869281 17.8067 Tutrakan 8.205673 18.25857 Tvarditca 12.41727 20.34369 Tzar Kaloyan 8.170732 16.93273 Tzarevo 11.2973 21.98319 Ugarchin 13.08889 20.52019 Valchedram 8.316456 17.06849 Valchi dol 8.794872 18.59552 Varbitza 8.829787 18.49786 Varna 11.45997 22.87727 Varshetc 10.26582 20.42556 Veliki Preslav 8.454545 19.74684 Veliko Tarnovo 9.797814 20.79425 Velingrad 10.42232 20.28203 Venetz 8.033333 18.58135 Vetovo 7.508474 17.26547 Vetrino 8.885715 19.4375 Vidin 11.00379 21.57121 Vratsa 10.19626 22.25006 Yablanitca 11.03448 20.5183 Yakimovo 10.95652 21 Yakoruda 8.806452 17.96112 Yambol 12.69359 23.46184 Zavet 7.797872 17.90061 Zemen 6.111111 12.22222 Zlataritza 8.019231 15.3753 Zlatitza 10.21212 22.45868 Zlatograd 8.241072 16.17645 22 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data REGIONAL LEVEL – TEACHING WORKFORCE INDICATORS Region BLAGOEVGRAD – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 23 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 24 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 25 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 26 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region BURGAS – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 27 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 28 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 29 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 30 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region DOBRICH – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 31 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 32 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 33 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 34 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region GABROVO – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 35 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 36 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 37 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region HASKOVO – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 38 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 39 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 40 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 41 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region KARDZHALI – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 42 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 43 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 44 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 45 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region KYUSTENDIL – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 46 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 47 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 48 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 49 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region LOVECH – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 50 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 51 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 52 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 53 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region MONTANA – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 54 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 55 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 56 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 57 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region PAZARDZHIK – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 58 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 59 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 60 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 61 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region PERNIK – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 62 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 63 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 64 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 65 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region PLEVEN – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 66 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 67 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 68 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 69 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region PLOVDIV – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 70 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 71 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 72 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 73 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region RAZGRAD – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 74 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 75 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 76 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 77 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region RUSE – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 78 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 79 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 80 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 81 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region SHUMEN – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 82 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 83 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 84 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 85 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region SILISTRA – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 86 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 87 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 88 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 89 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region SLIVEN – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 90 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 91 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 92 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region SMOLYAN – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 93 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 94 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 95 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 96 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region SOFIA – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 97 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 98 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 99 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 100 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) s 101 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 102 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 103 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region SOFIA CITY – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 104 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 105 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region STARA ZAGORA – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 106 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 107 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 108 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 109 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region TARGOVISHTE – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 110 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 111 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 112 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region VARNA – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 113 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 114 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 115 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 116 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region VELIKO TARNOVO – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 117 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 118 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 119 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 120 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region VIDIN – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 121 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 122 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 123 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 124 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region VRATSA – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 125 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 126 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) 127 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 128 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Region YAMBOL – teaching workforce indicators (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by age by municipality (2018) 129 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools below 35 years by municipality (2018) 130 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data Teachers in kindergartens and schools by ITE level by municipality (2018) Teachers in kindergartens and schools by PQD level by municipality (2018) 131 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data ANONYMIZED TEACHER LEVEL DATA ANALYSIS POTENTIAL AND PROPOSED KEY TEACHING WORKFORCE AND POLICY QUESTIONS A key recommendation to MOES is to consider the aspects presented below and address future policy plans by involving analysis at specific teacher level groups. A list of key workforce and teacher policy questions, that could be answered with teacher-level data, are presented below to indicate the scope of potential knowledge and system overview that can be inferred through anonymized teacher level data analysis. Policy questions to inform MOES workforce policy and planning To support MOES work focused on teacher policies, a list of potential questions that could be answered based on teacher level data analysis are suggested. From a future perspective, additional analysis could be produced shedding light into important teacher workforce dynamics and patterns that the mixture of policies in education has been producing during the current reform period: 1. Preparation of novice teachers and matching supply with demand: • Where do novice teachers go to work for their first job assignment? What type of schools (in terms of size, student characteristics, location) are more prone to receiving novice teachers? • How much time does it take novice teachers to obtain professional qualification degree (PQD)? Do novice teachers engage in PQD training as soon as they start teaching? Is the school in which they start teaching close to training providers? Does the teaching workload allow for novice teachers to have enough time to engage in training activities? • How much mentoring support and time do novice teachers receive from other teachers? What are the characteristics of mentor teachers? 2. The role of teacher supply in addressing demand challenges: • Are novice teachers entering schools with more demanding student needs? In particular, are schools with a large proportion of disadvantaged students (or schools in rural areas) attracting novice teachers? How are those schools staffed in terms of human resources to accommodate new-coming teachers? • Are the most effective teachers (or most qualified teachers) teaching in schools with more demanding needs? • What professions do teachers current leaving teaching move to? Do they join the private sector? If so, are teachers of particular subjects (e.g. math, science) more likely to join certain sectors? • Are teaching positions for specific subjects harder to fill? Which schools have more difficulties to fill in such positions? 3. Preventing excessive teacher turnover is fundamental for school well-functioning: • Are certain schools experiencing high teacher turnover? What is the degree of such turnover (what proportion of teachers leave the school every year)? What are the characteristics of such schools? Which teachers tend to leave their school (either to transfer to another school or leaving the profession)? Is this related to age or experience? 132 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 5. Teaching Workforce Basic Statistics and Data • Are certain groups of teachers more prone to change schools or leave the profession? What are their characteristics? 4. Teacher compensation and teacher workload per school type: • How much is spent on teacher salaries for every school? How does this translate in per student spending for every school in Bulgaria? Is there an empirically observed relation between student needs and teacher wage spending? • How many teaching hours does a teacher teach? Is this related to certain school or teacher characteristics? Is there evidence of teacher preference for certain schools because of lower teaching hours? • Are certain teacher contract schemes (part-time, short-term) more prevalent in certain schools? 5. Commute distances (home to workplace) for teachers and how does this relate to school and teacher characteristics: • What is the average commute distance to work for teachers? How many teachers commute long distances? • Do more qualified or effective teachers commute to isolated areas? • Do novice teachers live near their workplace or do they tend to commute more? • Are training providers (of PQD courses) available near teacher residence or workplace? Which teachers are more isolated from these providers? 6. Teacher characteristics variation within school, beyond averages: • Is there a concentration of highly qualified teachers in certain schools? What are these schools? • Is there a good mix in terms of teacher qualification, age and experience by school? Where is this mix more prevalent? Is this a geographical problem? Additional analysis could be produced shedding light into important school leadership dynamics and patterns. Below is a list of potential questions that could be addressed in additional data analysis in future work. 7. Principal and deputy principal characteristics: • Are these related to school characteristics in a particular way? • Do low socio-economic status schools have different principals or deputy principals? 8. Principal decisions: • Is the arrival of a new principal related to certain decisions regarding teacher hiring and teacher management? • Are teacher characteristics related to specific principal characteristics – e.g. gender, age, qualifications, experience, residence, commute distances? • Are principal characteristics related to higher teacher CPD? 9. Principal turnover: • What are the trends for principal turnover and retention in the system? • Is principal workforce and turnover related to certain school or teacher characteristics? 133 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations ANNEX 6 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING WORKFORCE POLICY ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations 19BG04 Bulgaria: A Roadmap to Teachers’ Policy Development and Reform Component I: Analytical policy review Analytical Framework for Teacher Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Interim Input to Guide Development of Outline and Final Policy Note March 26, 2020 2 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Table of Contents List of abbreviations ...................................................................................................................................... 5 I. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 6 A. Objective of the Project and Component I ....................................................................................... 6 B. Purpose of this Analytical Framework .............................................................................................. 7 C. Review of Existing Teacher Policy Frameworks ................................................................................ 7 D. Bulgaria Teacher Policy Mapping and Descriptive Analysis of Teacher Workforce........................ 10 II. Framework for Teacher Policies to Support Competency-Based Learning in Bulgaria ...................... 11 A. Features of Context for Teacher Policy ........................................................................................... 12 B. Learning at the Core: Orientation for All Teacher Policies ............................................................. 13 C. Three Policy Domains...................................................................................................................... 14 III. International Comparisons ................................................................................................................. 18 IV. Next Steps: Preparation of Outline ..................................................................................................... 18 Selected References .................................................................................................................................... 20 Annex: Policy Frameworks .......................................................................................................................... 22 A. Bulgaria’s Policy and Legislative Framework .................................................................................. 22 B. European Commission .................................................................................................................... 23 C. World Bank SABER Teachers ........................................................................................................... 25 D. World Bank World Development Report ........................................................................................ 26 E. UNESCO Teacher Policy Development Guide ................................................................................. 27 F. OECD TALIS...................................................................................................................................... 27 G. OECD PISA ....................................................................................................................................... 29 H. IEA PIRLS.......................................................................................................................................... 30 I. IEA TIMSS ........................................................................................................................................ 31 J. IEA ICCS ........................................................................................................................................... 31 3 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations 4 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations List of abbreviations CPD continuing professional development EU European Union ITE initial teacher education MOES Ministry of Education and Science PD professional development program PIRLS Progress in International Reading Literacy Study PISA Program for International Student Assessment SABER Systems Approach to Better Education Results SES socio-economic status SRSS Structural Reform Support Service TPT Teacher Policy Taskforce TALIS Teaching and Learning International Survey TIMMS Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study 5 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations I. Introduction Objective of the Project and Component I The aim of the project is to support the capacity of the Ministry of Education and Science (MOES) to design and implement teacher policies for preschool and general education in order to address teacher shortages and provide students with relevant skills and competences for the future. This project will provide technical support in two key policy areas to support the development of a cohesive effect of initiated investments in teacher policies, and to plan integrated measures to enhance the role of teachers in improving the education system. These policy areas are: (i) human resources with a focus on developing a strong policy framework to modernize the teaching profession while preparing the system for effective workforce management; and (ii) learning and teaching (skills) of teachers to improve learning outcomes in line with Bulgaria’s objective to promote the competence-based approach for teaching and learning. Finally, the project will develop recommendations and programs targeting adherence of Bulgarian teacher polices and administrative practices to the best international practices. Under Component I, the project will conduct an evidence-based analysis of teacher policies, functions, and practices with an explicit emphasis on situating the analysis within the Bulgarian and European contexts. Analysis would include relevant data and indicators utilizing (i) national data (MOES registers), (ii) international (e.g. TALIS, TIMSS, PIRLS, ICCS) sources on the conditions of teaching and learning, and (iii) mainly European policy examples with relevant EU comparisons to make connections with related policy areas such as school leadership and governance, drawing on best practices and relevant EU systems and programs. The process for conducting this analysis involves a series of steps as shown in the figure below. A mapping of teacher policies in Bulgaria is ongoing, with a focus on documenting system processes associated with teacher policies. This work is informing the development of a specific analytical framework (this document) and the approach for selection of teacher policy country comparators. These three elements will inform the development of the product outline (draft anticipated end March/early April 2020) and the final policy note. Figure 1. Process of analysis – steps 6 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Purpose of this Analytical Framework This analytical framework describes the organization of ideas regarding teacher policies and workforce planning, and the approach to such analysis in Bulgaria in line with Component 1 of the Agreement signed between the EC-SRSS and the World Bank (“Teaching workforce policy note and recommendations”). This framework helps to situate various elements of analysis that will feed into the outline and ultimately constitute the final teacher workforce policy note and recommendations (Output 1). However, it is intended to be flexible and can be adjusted as work proceeds to integrate and accommodate further information. The document orients the work of data collection and analysis as well as expert consultation and policy discussions with Bulgarian authorities. Sections of the framework document are described below: Section I – Introduction. This section describes the objective of the project and outlines the approach – data analysis and national and international expert consultations. It provides an overview of the Bulgarian, European, and international policy documents that inform this framework. Reference is also made to key pieces of the academic literature that provides the conceptual basis for the framework. Section 2 –Teacher Policies to Support Competency-Based Learning in Bulgaria: Key Framework Elements. This section is the heart of the analytical framework and lays out the details of the proposed framework, including (a) a central focus on learning, (b) the classification of three policy domains, and (c) four features of context. This section lays out a comprehensive array of policy issues from which a subset of high priority areas will be investigated during the project. This section also provides an analytical mapping between the proposed framework elements and the foundational documents from Bulgaria, the EU, and the larger international context which have informed the development of this framework. Section 3 - International Comparisons: To facilitate the planned consultation process, the process of selecting international comparators is described in detail in a separate document. Section 4 - Next Steps: This section describes next steps and the expected timeline towards development of the Outline. Annexes: These describe selected references and policy frameworks reviewed in developing this proposed framework. Review of Existing Teacher Policy Frameworks The review of these evidence-based frameworks for teacher policy analysis and development highlight the need to carefully answer two fundamental questions before presenting a framework for analysis in Bulgaria: what constitutes a “teacher policy” and how to account for differences between policy intent and policy implementation? 7 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations What is a “teacher policy”? Teacher policies are norms, regulations, procedures, plans, or strategies that address one or more of the following: (i) teaching practices and methods in the classroom, (ii) teachers as individuals and professional members of the education workforce, and (iii) teaching communities, networks, and contexts in which teachers work and live. Given the obvious importance of teachers and school leaders to the learning process and the wide range of public policy objectives in the education system, a holistic definition of teacher policies is warranted. How to account for differences between policy intent and policy implementation? A key element in developing this analytical framework is distinguishing between policy intent or design, and policy implementation in real and varied contexts. Policies “on the ground,” implemented in preschools, schools, classrooms, pedagogical universities, teacher training institutions, communities of practice, and other spaces and places may differ substantially from policies as they were conceived and written in official documents. However, policies are intended to achieve results, and poor or variable implementation may impact such results. This is highlighted in several of the above-mentioned frameworks, including the World Bank’s WDR 2018 framework and the OECD TALIS framework. Therefore, factors affecting the implementation of teacher policies are also relevant in the context of this analytical framework and described in more detail in the next section. Alternative Teacher Policy Frameworks and Assessment Frameworks The process for developing this framework involved first and foremost a review of Bulgaria’s vision for education sector development and its challenges related to the teaching workforce and education outcomes, as summarized in the Inception Report and the ongoing Mapping Exercise. This helped to juxtapose Bulgaria’s “starting point” and current situation against national priorities and aspirations for where authorities and the public would like the education system to be. The framework development process also involved a review of teacher policy principles at the European and international levels, summarized in a series of existing frameworks and advisory reports. This ensures that analysis of teacher workforce policy outcomes in Bulgaria will be sufficiently grounded in national priorities and contextual realities, as well as European and international norms and good practices. In particular, this analytical framework is derived from: (i) Bulgaria’s policy and legislative documents pertaining to introduction of competence-based learning and other reforms to the education system; (ii) the European Commission’s Guiding Principles on Policies to Support Teachers and School Leaders in Schools as Learning Organizations; (iii) the World Bank’s Systems Approach to Better Education Results (SABER) on what matters most for teacher policies and the World Development Report (WDR) 2018 Learning for All; (iv) UNESCO’s Teacher Policy Development Guide, (v) the OECD’s conceptual framework underlying its Teaching and Learning International Study (TALIS), and (vi) assessment frameworks underlying international large-scale student assessments and studies, particularly OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and IEA’s studies on reading literacy (PIRLS), science and mathematics (TIMSS), and civic and citizenship education (ICCS). These are described in more detail below and summarized in the Annex. Bulgaria’s Policy and Legislative Framework: Bulgaria’s priorities and aspirations for the development of its education system are at the core of this analytical framework. Such priorities and aspirations are detailed in several main documents, namely: (i) key legislation and bylaws such as the Preschool and School Education Act (PSEA) of 2016; (ii) national strategy documents, such as the National Strategy for 8 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Development of Pedagogical Staff 2014-2020; and (iii) guidance notes and other policy analysis, such as the four booklets prepared in early 2020 by the MOES explaining competency-based approaches to teachers. European Commission Guiding Principles and Strategic Documents: This analytical framework is also informed by key EC strategy documents and guiding principles underlying teacher policy development and policy coordination in the European Union Member States, namely the ET 2020 strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training, the Education and Training Monitor, European Semester Country Assessment for Bulgaria, and the findings of the ET 2020 Working Group on Schools. In particular, the framework incorporates guiding principles for policy development as expressed in the report on ‘Teachers and School Leaders in Schools as Learning Organizations.’ This report summarizes the results of joint work with 30+ European countries’ governments and stakeholder organizations. Reflection on these principles ensures that analysis and recommendations will be well-targeted for Bulgaria within the European context and in line with policy coordination goals of the European Commission. World Bank Systems Assessment for Better Education Results (SABER) Framework: This analytical framework also considers the teacher policy goals and policy levers included into the World Bank’s SABER framework for effective teachers. This framework identifies eight policy goals that are informed by international evidence on effective teaching, providing a lens for focusing attention on relevant dimensions of teacher policies and thinking about prioritizing among competing options for teacher policy reform. Bulgaria completed the World Bank’s SABER Teachers analysis in 2013, this instrument is focused on teacher policy intent, and as such it does not delve into contextual variation in Bulgaria and how it impacts implementation of such policies. Hence, the proposed analytical framework draws on that SABER analysis while both broadening the scope and deepening the analysis in the Bulgarian context. World Bank World Development Report 2018 Framework on Learning to Realize Education’s Promise: The World Bank’s 2018 World Development Report (WDR) on education proposed a framework for education policy centered on student learning and based on international evidence. This framework identifies four key school-level factors driving learning, including preparation of learners to learn, quality and availability of school inputs, quality of school leadership and managerial practices, and teacher skill and motivation. This framework highlights the importance of context—teachers working within different types of school environments, and the importance of other school-level factors which enhance or diminish effectiveness of teachers. This is an important element for Bulgaria given the high level of between-school inequality in student learning outcomes. UNESCO Teacher Policy Development Guide: In 2008, UNESCO created its Teacher Policy Development Guide to support countries develop evidence-based national teacher policy as an integrated component of national education sector plans or policies. A key element of this policy framework is the principle that a comprehensive (holistic) teacher policy includes the widest range of interlocking dimensions affecting teachers, and that such an approach is best for policy sustainability and impact. The framework notes that many dimensions of teacher policy are interrelated and rooted in a country’s historical, political, cultural or economic context and must be considered together as part of an integrated policy. This is even more critical in Bulgaria as national policy is developed through a coordinated European process aimed at European integration and policy coordination. OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) Framework: The conceptual map underlying the OECD’s TALIS survey also has informed the development of the analytical framework presented below. 9 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations The TALIS conceptual map distinguishes between themes along two dimensions: (i) focus, or the extent to which a theme is concerned with professional characteristics or pedagogical practices of institutions or teachers, and (ii) level, or whether the theme operates and references institutions or individual teachers. This is also a critical aspect of relevance for Bulgaria: the difference between levels at which policy is designed or implemented (national, regional, school, or individual), and the difference between intended policy target (groups of teachers, the total teacher workforce, schools, etc.). The TALIS framework is based on evidence showing that school-level influences tend to operate indirectly on students through their effects on teacher and classroom influences. This is also an important element for Bulgaria, demonstrating how teacher policies interact with other school-level influences in reality which must be accounted for in the policy analysis and development process. Large-Scale Student Assessments and Studies: All large-scale student learning assessments and studies in which Bulgaria has participated were also reviewed and reflected in the framework. This includes OECD’s PISA (targeting 15-year-old students) as well as IEA’s Progress on International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS, targeting 4th grade students), IEA’s Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS, targeting 4th and/or 8th grade students), and IEA’s International Civic and Citizenship Education Study (ICCS, targeting 8th grade students). All four assessments and studies are designed to account for variation in context, including among teachers, and as a result, all such studies have been used to inform a framework tailored for teacher policy in Bulgaria while also providing an extensive array of data on teacher backgrounds and qualifications, teacher instructional and assessment practices, and teaching environments, among other areas. Given Bulgaria’s participation in such large-scale student assessments and studies over multiple years, these studies provide a relevant source of data both for within-country and cross-country analysis. Bulgaria Teacher Policy Mapping and Descriptive Analysis of Teacher Workforce To inform the analytical framework, policy questions, and structure of the outline and final policy note, an extensive teacher policy mapping has been ongoing. This mapping work has focused on Bulgaria- specific processes associated with existing teacher policies. More specifically, the mapping includes: (i) a desk review of key regulations, strategic documents and key policy instruments related to teacher policies in Bulgaria; (ii) analysis of publicly available data or data otherwise provided to the World Bank from MOES under similar analytical activities; (iii) interviews with experts from the administration identified by MOES; and (iv) consultations with international experts and initial hypothesis development following existing policy processes. This exercise has been undertaken by World Bank team members and local experts with a focus on several interrelated policy areas, including competency-based learning, teacher workforce planning and management, finance for teacher policies, continuing professional development (CPD) and qualifications, legislative and strategic policy frameworks, role of EU structural funds, and management and monitoring processes for teacher policy. Going into detail, the work is focused on existing teacher workforce management and planning policies, practices and core policy processes. The work is building the relationship between instruments and investments in the period 2014-2020 (the actual planning period for education policies in Bulgaria) to build a basis for policy outcomes analysis and assessments. The following list indicates the level of detail and consolidation of knowledge on which the mapping work is focused. Several of these elements will develop together as analysis proceeds towards development of the Outline: 10 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations • Education workforce management practices, processes and outcomes planning and monitoring at both system and provision level for initial teacher training, deployment, career management, and retirement; • Basic teacher education, associated policies and inflows/outflows from the education system; • Tools, multi-annual or annual programs, and other operational instruments for teacher continuing professional development (CPD); • Teacher CPD policy processes managed by MOES at the system level and the relevant processes at institutional, regional and service provision level; • Role of (pre)school management and factors influencing CPD planning and management decisions at (pre)school and regional level. • Scope and instruments of competency-based policy and approaches, and their relevance to CPD processes, programs and outcomes. • Existing system (including programs and instruments) for monitoring and evaluation of impact of CPD programs. • Financial framework for education policies, workforce management and CPD. • Role and outcomes of EU Operational Programme funding and implementation for CPD of teachers. In addition, specific analysis on the teacher workforce is being planned and organized based on the existing register of MOES on teachers. The analysis will describe specific parameters of the teacher workforce to identify, assess and inform on specific workforce characteristics, strengths, challenges, and policy trends. The goal of this work is to consolidate evidence organized according to the teacher workforce lifecycle, a cornerstone of the analytical framework presented in Section 2. This will reflect both the current workforce (under CPD training) and the future workforce (under basic teacher education).1 II. Framework for Teacher Policies to Support Competency-Based Learning in Bulgaria The purpose of the proposed analytical framework is to orient and structure the analysis on teacher workforce planning and policy and ensure that findings are well-targeted to Bulgaria’s current and future needs and specific circumstances. It is also intended to inform and organize the analytical work, the development of the outline and the final policy note. This framework contains two key elements: (i) features of context for teacher policy which reflect variation across the teacher workforce cycle, across levels of education, locus of implementation and different aspects of the external enabling environment; and (ii) policy domains which reflect teachers’ placement within their classrooms, their schools, and the larger education system. The framework is also guided by the foundational and orienting principle that all teacher and educational policies should be aligned towards learning as the key objective of schooling. In this format, the framework aims to be comprehensive in scope. The elements of the framework are described in turn below. 1 This descriptive analysis will be conducted to the extent possible given existing data limitations associated with the data itself as maintained by MOES, and limitations associated with accessing data due to EU GDPR-related national regulations. 11 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Features of Context for Teacher Policy The framework takes as a starting point four groups of features of context where teacher policies play out in the larger environment in which teachers work and schools operate. These four features are described below. The purpose of this is to start from an in-depth mapping and assessment of contextual features for teacher policy implementation in Bulgaria. Figure 2. Features of Context for Teacher Policy Feature 1: Teacher Workforce Lifecycle. This element of the framework recognizes that the competences, needs, and motivations of teachers at various stages of their career are different. As such, policies need to be adapted accordingly, both to attract and motivate individual teachers while also managing inflows and outflows from the teacher workforce. The teacher workforce lifecycle is an essential cornerstone of this framework since policies and planning of the teacher workforce are the ultimate focus of this analysis. In line with other frameworks for analyzing teacher policies, this framework will cover all stages of the teacher workforce lifecycle, from preparation, including initial teacher education, to recruitment and deployment, career management, professional development, attrition, and retirement. The management of this workforce lifecycle affects the flows in and out of the teaching profession, as well as the attributes, skills, knowledge, networks, attitudes, and motivations of teachers in the workforce at different stages of their careers. It should be noted that this analytical framework considers the teacher workforce lifecycle as one of several contextual features, whereas other teacher policy frameworks focus exclusively on the teacher workforce lifecycle. Since the focus in Bulgaria is on both human resource management and the quality and skills of the teacher workforce to promote competency-based learning, it is critical that the teacher workforce lifecycle be incorporated within a larger set of contextual features relevant for teacher workforce management and planning. Feature 2: Curriculum-Oriented Level of Education. This element of the framework recognizes that policies for teacher workforce planning and management need to distinguish as applicable between levels of education, particularly in relation to the curriculum learning standards. The supply and demand for preschool education, for example, has implications for teacher workforce planning that do not apply similar to school education, and vice versa. Furthermore, the qualifications and skills of classroom 12 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations teachers working at the elementary education level also differ from those of subject teachers working at the basic education level above grade 5, after the curriculum introduces separate subjects and then those working in secondary education grades 7-12. Feature 3: Locus of Implementation. This element of the framework recognizes that policies must appropriately target a level within the system for implementation and account for differing responsibilities at different levels. For example, national policies that are operationalized at the level of localities or schools must account for variation at these levels which would affect quality and fidelity of implementation. Following ongoing education reforms, the developed education funding model is demonstrating increased attention to local specifics with direct funding for schools and targeted programs based on local context. This is an example of how locus of implementation is a relevant feature for analysis from the perspective of teacher policies. Feature 4: External Enabling Environment. Finally, this element of the framework recognizes that teacher and education policies interact with broader enabling policies and conditions, like economic trends, legal framework, and financial and social conditions. While this will not be a major component of the analysis, it is important that teacher workforce planning and management is conducted in close coordination with the wider enabling environment to ensure its sustainability and policy coherence over time. Contextual analysis of teacher policy in Bulgaria will consider two lenses: spatial and temporal. Spatial analysis takes into consideration variation by geographical location. Such analysis would examine to the extent possible based on data availability, differences between urban and rural areas, by region or localities/communities (e.g. in the case of Roma-majority communities), and differences at the school level. The level of detailed spatial analysis will depend on the availability of disaggregated data. Temporal analysis considers differences across time, with a retrospective view of what has occurred during the last decade related to teacher policy in Bulgaria, what types of problems or issues have been identified, the policy responses taken, assessment of the respective outcomes, the policy diagnosis. More specifically, the starting point for this temporal lens of the analysis will be linked to the start of the strategic period 2014-2020 to observe policy needs and achievements in time and to the availability of data covering the last ten years of education policies in Bulgaria. Learning at the Core: Orientation for All Teacher Policies Figure 3. Learning at the Core The features of context for teacher policy in Bulgaria serve as foundations for the analytical framework. However, the framework builds on this foundation towards a central guiding principle of learning—not schooling—as the core objective of all educational policies. Learning is at the heart of any education system, yet evidence shows time and again that schooling is not the same as learning. This means that vision and policy coherence are required to align expectations and efforts towards learning. Putting learning at the core requires coherent and aligned policies that establish clear expectations for students in terms of learning outcomes and for teachers in terms of 13 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations professional competences and practices. It requires ownership of learning goals, incorporating national, regional and local priorities and perspectives. It also requires recognition of diversity among learners and communities and flexibility for teachers to differentiate their approaches to meet diverse learning needs and goals. Bulgaria’s Pre-School and School Education Act (PSEA) of 2016 clearly articulates the national vision for learning. The PSEA identifies several important principles of learning including orientation to individual interests and motivations of the child, ability to use competences mastered in practice, equal access and inclusion, innovation in pedagogical practices, transparency of management, and autonomy in the pursuit of educational policies, self-government and decentralization. It also specifies core objectives for learning, including: the intellectual, emotional, social, spiritual, moral and physical development of every child in accordance with their age, needs, abilities and interests; acquisition of competences needed for successful personal and professional development; shaping of attitudes and motivation for lifelong learning; and knowledge of national, European and global cultural values and traditions, among others. Bulgaria’s transition to inclusive and competence-based learning has significant implications for teachers and schools in several dimensions, such as teaching methods and practices in the classroom, organization of teachers’ work, and teacher preparation, professional development, and career progression. For example, competence-based learning requires a transition towards cross-subject linkages and interdisciplinary approaches.2 This may require more time for teachers to collaborate within schools and to network with other teachers, and more capacity and empowerment for teachers to adapt curricula and pedagogical practices in the classroom. Competence-based learning also requires more differentiation of instruction on the part of teachers, requiring new and complex teacher skillsets and more autonomy. Learning at the core as an orienting principle underlying all teacher policies is consistent with policy aims expressed in Bulgaria’s priorities for the sector and in other teacher policy frameworks: Learning at the Core: Orientation for All Teacher Policies Selected Teacher Policy Frameworks Relevant Policy Areas Bulgarian Government Priorities • Coherence of policy areas to ensure introduction of competency-based approaches to teaching and learning • Competence framework(s) EU Guiding Principles • Coherence of policies • Shared vision and understanding • Setting expectations World Bank SABER Teacher Policy Goals • Setting clear expectations for teachers UNESCO Teacher Policy Dimensions • Teacher standards Three Policy Domains To link the features of context with the overriding and central principle of learning at the core, this framework introduces three policy domains based on international evidence and other teacher policy frameworks which recognize teachers’ individual viewpoints from within the system. This framework has 2 MOES (2019). On the Transition from Knowledge to Skills. Booklet No. 2. 14 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations identified three policy domains which are overlapping from the perspective of an individual teacher, reflecting the fact that teachers are simultaneously ‘situated’ in different positions within the education system: (i) within their classrooms, interacting directly with students towards the curriculum and development of key competences; (ii) within their schools, interacting with peers, school leaders and broader school community (including parents) through social and professional networks; and (iii) within their profession and the larger education system, interacting with institutions through teacher labor markets, employment contracts and conditions, performance incentives, and similar structures. These three overlapping positions reflect different elements of teachers’ work and professional lives, which are directly connected to three policy domains, as summarized in the figure and descriptions below. All three domains need to be considered jointly when analyzing teacher policies for workforce planning and management. For example, policies within these domains affect the supply and demographic composition of the teacher workforce since they influence the perceptions of prospective entrants to the profession, teachers’ choice of school, and teachers’ choice to stay in the profession or leave altogether. They also influence teacher commitment, competence, and performance while in the profession, thereby contributing to the composition of skills and qualifications in the teaching workforce. Figure 4. Three Policy Domains Domain 1: Teacher Standards and Competences This policy domain focuses on teacher competences and capacity to carry out core pedagogical work in the classroom, including the transition to competence-based approaches to teaching and learning. It is predicated on the vision of teachers as capable and responsible agents of change. A core element of this policy domain is teacher competency standards. Such standards, connected to expectations for what students should know and be able to do, are essential to preparing and supporting teachers for: (i) high- quality instruction; (ii) to organize instructional time, collaborate towards common goals, and identify needs for professional development; (iii)they can also support providers of initial teacher education and continuing professional development to align content and approach of offerings to teacher needs; (iv) 15 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations support development of other policies aimed at building and strengthening teachers’ skills, including in relation to teacher education and professional development, teacher monitoring and feedback, teacher networking and collaboration, and teacher instructional practices. This domain is consistent and aligned with policy aims expressed in other teacher policy frameworks: Policy Domain 1: Teacher Standards and Competences Selected Teacher Policy Frameworks Relevant Policy Areas EU Guiding Principles • Setting expectations • Professional competences, capacity and autonomy • Research, reflective practice, and enquiry World Bank SABER Teacher Policy • Setting clear expectations for teachers Goals • Preparing teachers with useful training and experience • Supporting teachers to improve instruction UNESCO Teacher Policy Dimensions • Teacher standards • Teacher education TALIS Conceptual Themes • Teacher education and initial preparation • Teacher feedback and development • Teachers’ professional and instructional practices • Teacher self-efficacy Domain 2: School Communities and Connections (teachers in their schools and local communities) This policy domain focuses on teachers embedded within their schools and local communities. The day- to-day contexts in which teachers work significantly affect the implementation of policies intended to attract the best into teaching or to improve teaching practices at the school level. Financial and material constraints, poor quality learning materials, resources, and environments, lack of leadership, and difficult working conditions all affect teacher motivation and capacity to drive student learning. On the other hand, collaborative working environments, distributed leadership, networking opportunities, productive engagement with parents, and a supportive culture of schools as learning organizations can enhance teaching. Additionally, disadvantaged schools can benefit disproportionately from connections to wider networks of expertise and from recruitment of talented teachers and school leaders. Therefore, effective school leadership and supportive school cultures are essential for providing teachers with the attractive and productive working conditions needed to improve teaching and learning. This domain is consistent and aligned with policy aims expressed in other teacher policy frameworks: Domain 2: School Communities and Connections Selected Teacher Policy Frameworks Relevant Policy Areas EU Guiding Principles • School leaders and teachers shaping learning systems • Professional culture • Professional competences, capacity, and autonomy • Leadership competence World Bank SABER Teacher Policy • Attracting the best into teaching (working conditions) Goals • Matching teachers’ skills with student needs • Leading teachers with strong principals 16 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations UNESCO Teacher Policy Dimensions • Teacher recruitment and retention • Teacher deployment • Teacher employment and working conditions • School governance TALIS Conceptual Themes • School leadership • School climate Domain 3: Governance, Accountability and Incentives This policy domain focuses on the governance, accountability, and incentives that attract teachers into the profession, motivate them to remain in the profession and perform, and influence their career progression more broadly within the education system. This relates to institutional conditions and arrangements driving the teacher workforce and teacher career paths within the profession, as well as teacher accountability, incentives, monitoring, and evaluation. Domain 3: Governance, Accountability and Incentives Selected Teacher Policy Frameworks Relevant Policy Areas EU Guiding Principles • Coherence of policies • Professional competences, capacity, and autonomy World Bank SABER Teacher Policy • Attracting the best into teaching Goals • Matching teachers’ skills with student needs • Monitoring teaching and learning • Motivating teachers to perform UNESCO Teacher Policy Dimensions • Teacher recruitment and retention • Deployment • Career structures/paths • Teacher employment and working conditions • Teacher reward and remuneration • Teacher accountability TALIS Conceptual Themes • HR issues and stakeholder relations Finally, the diagram below summarizes the complete analytical framework, starting from the contextual features of teacher policy, and including the three policy domains and the orienting principle of learning at the core. The concept behind this integrated analytical framework is that of a combination lock dial, with the central foundational principle of ‘learning at the core’ as well as the three policy domains that interact against a backdrop of contextual features which vary within Bulgaria and vis-à-vis other countries. This analytical framework aims to provide an integrated approach to analyzing policy for teacher workforce planning and management in Bulgaria and a starting point for development of the outline and final policy note. 17 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Figure 5. Analytical Framework for Teacher Workforce Policy Assessment in Bulgaria III. International Comparisons The analysis also includes a selection of systematic country comparisons for Bulgaria to inform key teacher policy goals, provide examples, serve as an evidence-based resource for policy improvement, and to address challenges. The selection of these systematic country comparisons benefitted from a parallel analytical approach based on internationally comparable data with a focus on student learning outcomes. This follows the overall analytical framework approach described above, particularly on assessing learning achievements and putting learning at the core of teacher policy development and teacher workforce planning. Given that the comparator countries will be subject of a consultative process, the proposal and the associated analytical overview are provided as a separate file. Following the final consultations and decisions taken by the project Teacher Policy Taskforce (TPT), the country comparisons will be integrated in this document and under this section, leading to the development of the outline and policy note. The country comparisons memo is titled Selection of Systematic Country Comparisons for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria: Draft Proposal for the Selection of 3 Systematic Country Comparisons and Comparator Cases. IV. Next Steps: Preparation of Outline The analytical framework above and selection of international comparisons is representing the guiding principles and approach of the ongoing analytical work and then will inform the outline of the policy note focused on teacher policies. The preparation of the outline is proceeding in several directions: (i) development of structured policy questions, targeted according to the framework presented above and 18 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations linked to various data sources; (ii) further data work and knowledge consolidation process, and (ii) development of teacher policy cases in line with targeted policy questions, drawing on a larger array of country examples. These would be discussed in more detail through the consultation process. According to the project timeline, discussed at kick off (October 2019) and later specified for Component I (February 2020), the outline for the final policy note will be drafted, consulted and finalized as indicated in the table below. Outline for the policy note: The consultation of the outline with EU is planned to start in the beginning of April 2020. The consultation and feedback from MOES including a discussion and formal approval by the TPT is expected by the end of April 2020. Indicative timeline* Outputs and Milestones Dec-19 May-20 A1.(d) Review and mapping of BG practices against EU and international norms in workforce management in education Dec-19 Feb-20 Formulation of approach for selection of comparator countries Jan-20 Mar-20 Quantitative analysis of education outcomes (specific focus on teachers) in comparison with EU and other education systems. Data set composition. February 3-5 Technical Mission Feb-20 Mar-20 Formulation of policy needs - system outcomes framework to inform comparators selection (current document) March 14-26 Technical Mission Mar-20 Mar-20 Milestone: Scope of comparator countries discussed and agreed. Teacher Policy Taskforce (TPT) agreement on comparators (March 31, 2020) Feb-20 May-20 Review and comparison of teacher policies in Bulgaria to comparators Jan-20 Jun-20 A1.(e) Policy note and recommendations Jan-20 Feb-20 Formulation of framework for analysis based on policy mapping and policy outcomes data April 13-16 Technical Mission Mar-20 Apr-20 Milestone: Scope and outline of the policy note discussed and accepted by TPT (April 31, 2020) Mar-20 Apr-20 Policy note: First draft for consultation EU May 7-15 Technical Mission May-20 Jun-20 Policy note: Draft addressing comments from EU for consultation with MOES June 7-12 Technical Mission May-20 Jun-20 Milestone: A workshop to present and discuss the findings from analytical work (refers to Component 3) (June 30, 2020) May-20 Jun-20 Output 1 Policy note and recommendations (June 30, 2020) * Indicates the implementation period for each activity. For each output the delivery date planned corresponds to the last day of the respective month 19 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Selected References Ainley, J. and Carstens, R. 2018. Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) Conceptual Framework. OECD Education Working Paper No. 187. Bietenbeck, J. 2014. Teaching Practices and Cognitive Skills. Labour Economics, Vol. 30, pp. 143-153. Boyadjieva, P. A. 2013. Admissions Policies as a Mechanism for Social Engineering: The Case of the Bulgarian Communist Regime. Comparative Education Review, Vol. 57, No. 3, pp. 503-526. Bruns, B. and Luque, J. 2015. Great Teachers: How to Raise Student Learning in Latin America and the Caribbean. Washington, DC: World Bank. Caprara, G. et al. 2006. Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students’ academic achievement: a study at the school level. Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 44, No. 6, pp. 473-490. Coflan, A., Ragatz, A., Hasan, A., and Pan, Y. 2018. Understanding Effective Teaching Practices in Chinese Classrooms: Evidence from a Pilot Study of Primary and Junior Secondary Schools in Guangdong, China. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 8396. Darling-Hammond, L. 2010. Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness: How Teacher Performance Assessments Can Measure and Improve Teaching. Center for American Progress, Washington, DC. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M., and Gardner, M. 2017. Effective Teacher Professional Development. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute. Education Commission. 2019. Transforming the Education Workforce: Learning Teams for a Learning Generation. New York: Education Commission. European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. 2018. Teaching Careers in Europe: Access, Progression and Support. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. European Commission. 2018. Boosting Teacher Quality: Pathways to Effective Policies. Directorate- General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture. European Commission. 2018. Teachers and school Leaders in Schools as Learning Organizations. ET 2020 Working Group. Fullan, M. et al. 2015. Professional Capital as Accountability. Education Policy Analysis Archives, Vol. 23, p. 1-15. Gomendio, M. 2017. Empowering and Enabling Teachers to Improve Equity and Outcomes for All. International Summit on the Teaching Profession, OECD Publishing, Paris. Hallinger, P. 2011. Leadership for Learning: Lessons from 40 Years of Empirical Research. Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 49, No. 2., pp. 125-142. Hanushek, E., Piopiunik, M., and Wiederhold, S. 2018. The Value of Smarter Teachers: International Evidence on Teacher Cognitive Skills and Student Performance. Journal of Human Resources. Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. 2007. The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, Vol. 77, No. 1, pp. 71-112. Hsiao, C., Peng, H., and Lee, B. C. 2009. A Dynamic Demand-Supply Model for Elementary School Teachers in Taiwan. International Journal of Electronic Business Management. Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 190- 200. Ingersoll, R. 2001. Teacher Turnover and Teacher Shortages: An Organizational Analysis. American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 38, No. 3., pp. 499-534. 20 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Leithwood, K. and D. Jantzi. 2009. A Review of Empirical Evidence about School Size Effects: A Policy Perspective. Review of Educational Research, Vol. 79, No. 1, pp. 464-490. Muller, K. Alliata, R., and Benninghoff, F. 2009. Attracting and retaining teachers: a question of motivation. Educational Management Administration and Leadership. Vol. 37, No. 5., pp. 574-599. Munich, D. and Rivkin, S. 2015. Analysis of Incentives to Raise the Quality of Instruction. European Expert Network on Economics of Education (EENEE). EENEE Analytical Report No. 26, prepared for the European Commission. OECD. 2013. Teachers for the 21st Century: Using Evaluation to Improve Teaching. OECD Publishing. Paniagua, A. and Istance, D. 2018. Teachers as Designers of Learning Environments: The Importance of Innovative Pedagogies. Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris. Popova, A., Evans, D., Breeding, M., and Arancibia, V. 2017. Global Landscape of Teacher Professional Development Programs: The Gap Between Evidence and Practice. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper. Rice, J. K., Roellke, C., Sparks, D., and Kolbe, T. 2009. Piecing Together the Teacher Policy Landscape: A Policy Problem Typology. Teachers College Record, Vol. 111, No. 2., pp. 511-546. Schleicher, A., ed. 2012. Preparing Teachers and Developing School Leaders for the 21st Century: Lessons from around the World. OECD Publishing. Thapa, A. et al. 2013. A Review of School Climate Research. Review of Educational Research, Vol. 83, No. 3, pp. 357-385. UNESCO. 2015. Teacher Policy Development Guide. Paris: UNESCO Publishing. Vermeulen, C. 2019. Hot for Teacher: Studies on Teacher Career and Skill Development in the Netherlands. Maastricht: ProefschriftMaken Maastricht. Worth, J., Lynch, S., Hillary, J., Rennie, C., and Andrade, J. 2018. Teacher Workforce Dynamics in England. Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER). World Bank. 2013. What Matters Most for Teacher Policies: A Framework Paper. SABER Working Paper Series, No. 4. 21 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Annex: Policy Frameworks Bulgaria’s Policy and Legislative Framework Legislation and Bylaws • Preschool and School Education Act (PSEA) (2016) • Higher Education Act (amended 2018) • Act on Development of Academic Staff (amended 2019) • Public Access to Information Act (amended 2016) • Vocational Education and Training Act (amended 2018) • Level of Education, General Education Minimum and Syllabus Act (amended 2018) • Collective Labour Agreement for the Preschool and School Education System and Annex from November 12, 2019 • Associated regulations and ordinances Ordinance No 1 on the Terms and Procedure for the Reimbursement of Transportation Costs or Rental Costs of Pedagogical Specialists in the Institutions in the Pre-school and School Education System (2017); Ordinance No. 2 on the Register of Institutions in the Preschool and School Education System (2017); Ordinance No. 3 on the Terms and Procedures of Admission and Education of Persons Seeking or Granted International Protection (2017);Ordinance No. 4 on Determining Work Quotas and Remuneration (2017); Ordinance No. 5 on General Education (2015); Ordinance No. 5 on Preschool education (2016); Ordinance No. 5 on the Register of Vocational Colleges (2017); Ordinance No. 11 on Assessment of Pupils’ Learning Outcomes (2016); Ordinance No. 15 on Kindergarten and School Inspections (2016); Ordinance No. 15 on the Status and Professional Development of Teachers, Directors, and Other Education Specialists (2019); Ordinance No. 16 on Institutional Quality Management (2016); Ordinance on Inclusive education (2017); Ordinance on Financing the Institutions in the System of Preschool and School Education (2017); Ordinance on the State Requirements for Acquiring Teacher Professional Qualification (2017) National Strategies • National Strategy for Development of Pedagogical Staff (2014-2020) • National Strategy for Development of Vocational Education and Training in Bulgaria (2015-2020) • National Strategy for Development of Higher Education Bulgaria (2014-2020) • National Strategy for Educational Integration of Children and Students from Ethnic Minorities (2015-2020) • National Strategy for Effective Implementation of Information and Communication Technologies in the Field of Education and Science in Bulgaria (2014-2020) • National Strategy for Lifelong Learning (2014-2020) • National Strategy for Promoting and Improving Literacy (2014-2020) • National Strategy for Reduction of the Share of Early School Drop-out rates (2013-2020) 22 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations • National Qualifications Framework of Republic of Bulgaria Guidance Notes and Mapping Exercise • Four booklets explaining competency-based approaches to teachers (2020) European Commission The 2020 Working Groups identified guiding principles on policies (see Figure) to support teachers and school leaders in schools as learning organizations are based on research, policy experiences from European countries and joint peer learning. They provide a frame for the sharing and analysis of recent developments in countries. These principles include: 1. EDUCATION AS A LEARNING SYSTEM: Education should be an inclusive learning system with a key role for teachers and school leaders. 2. COHERENCE OF POLICIES: Policy-makers should aim to achieve coherence across the system, aligning different policies directly affecting teachers and school leaders and embedding them in wider school policies, to serve the ultimate objective of ensuring high quality education for all learners. 3. SHARED VISION AND UNDERSTANDING: Shared vision and understanding, which consider national, regional and local perspectives and priorities on school policy, give direction to the work of schools as learning organisations and to the systems by which they are supported. 4. SETTING EXPECTATIONS: Clear expectations for the engagement of teachers and school leaders that can be set through frameworks such as standards, competence frameworks and curricula, help to define roles within learning organisations. 5. SCHOOL LEADERS AND TEACHERS SHAPING LEARNING SYSTEMS: School leaders and teachers should be acknowledged and respected for their expertise and their contribution to developing the education system at different levels. 6. PROFESSIONAL CULTURE: Education systems can help schools develop professional working and learning cultures that motivate teachers and school leaders. 7. RESEARCH, REFLECTIVE PRACTICE AND ENQUIRY: Policies should support a culture of research, reflective practice and enquiry-based learning at school. 8. PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCES, CAPACITY AND AUTONOMY: Teachers and school leaders should be supported in their professional development, autonomy and growth in a continuum spanning all phases of their careers 9. LEADERSHIP COMPETENCE: Systems should provide opportunities for school leaders and teachers to develop leadership competences that support them in strategic thinking and planning. 23 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Figure A1: What makes a school a learning organisation? Source: OECD/UNICEF 2016 and referenced in European Commission, 2018 The diagram below demonstrates how the nine guiding principles are situated within the multi-level education system. This reflects the locus of implementation for the respective guiding principles while also indicating the importance of linkages between levels of the system. Source: European Commission, 2018 24 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations World Bank SABER Teachers Education systems around the world vary greatly in the content of the regulations they put in place to organize issues such as who is allowed to teach and what qualifications they are expected to have, under what conditions they will be teaching, how their work will be monitored, rewarded, and supported, among many others. Understanding the ways in which each education system regulates these issues is crucial to inform policy options. Thus, developing a comprehensive description of the policies an education system puts in place to manage its teaching force is a necessary first step to assess the strength of these policies and their potential to improve education quality in a given system. The SABER Teachers Framework provides a set of categories through which to map policies a given education system puts in place to regulate who and how will be teaching its students. It aims to answer the question, from a descriptive point of view, what do education systems do in terms of teacher policies? To develop this set of categories, the SABER Teachers framework reviewed past efforts that characterize and compare teacher policies in different parts of the world, including OECD TALIS, Eurydice publications comparing teacher policies across Europe, the International Review of Curriculum and Assessment (INCA) database for European countries; Education Week’s Quality Counts which contains a module on teacher policies in the United States; and analysis of other empirical and academic literature from the United States and elsewhere. The SABER Teachers Framework identifies eight teacher policy goals that were (a) linked to performance; (b) a priority for resource allocation; and (c) actionable. The framework is also based on empirical evidence, resulting in the following eight policy goals: Figure A2: Eight Teacher Policy Goals Source: World Bank (2013). What Matters Most for Teacher Policies: A Framework Paper. 25 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations World Bank World Development Report The World Bank’s World Development Report (2018) argues that effective teaching depends on teachers’ skills and motivation. Many systems struggle to attract strong candidates into teaching and to provide a solid foundation of subject or pedagogical knowledge before they start teaching. As a result, new teachers often find themselves in classrooms with little mastery of the content they are to teach. Once teachers are in place, the professional development they receive is often inconsistent and overly theoretical. In some countries, the cost of this training is enormous. Moreover, education systems often have few effective mechanisms in place to mentor, support, and motivate teachers—even though teachers’ skills do nothing for learning unless teachers choose to apply them in the classroom. Fortunately, teachers’ skills and motivation can be strengthened, leading to greater effort and more learning, with three main promising principles emerging: (i) For effective teacher training, design it to be individually targeted and repeated, with follow-up coaching—often around a specific pedagogical technique; (ii) To keep learners from falling behind to the point where they cannot catch up, target teaching to the level of the student; (iii) Use pecuniary and nonpecuniary incentives to improve the motivation of teachers, ensuring that the incentivized actions are within teachers’ capacity. The framework diagram below from the WDR 2018 shows teachers situated in a web of actors and resources which interact in support of student learning. This framework highlights the importance of accounting for these interactions and relationships in order to assess how changes in teacher policy might or might not have an impact on student learning outcomes, and how implementation context may enhance or detract from the intent of the teacher policy. Figure A3: Aligning the system surrounding teachers to focus on learning Source: World Development Report. World Bank 2018 26 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations UNESCO Teacher Policy Development Guide In 2008, UNESCO created its Teacher Policy Development Guide to support countries develop evidence- based national teacher policy as an integrated component of national education sector plans or policies. A key element of this policy framework is the principle that a comprehensive (holistic) teacher policy includes the widest range of interlocking dimensions affecting teachers, and that such an approach is best for policy sustainability and impact. The framework notes that many dimensions of teacher policy are interrelated and rooted in a country’s historical, political, cultural or economic context and must be considered together as part of an integrated policy. The UNESCO Framework highlights nine key dimensions considered crucial to any comprehensive teacher policy: • Teacher Recruitment and Deployment based on current and projected qualitative and quantitative needs • Teacher Education (Initial and Continuing), with initial teacher education planned as part of a teacher recruitment strategy, induction training, and effective continuing professional development linked to career and salary progression • Deployment, based on a strategy that balances schools’ needs and teacher well-being • Career Structures/Paths which allow for progression and development over a teacher’s career • Teacher Employment and Working Conditions which motivate teachers and the school team to produce professional teaching, job satisfaction and teacher effectiveness • Teacher Reward and Remuneration including monetary and non-monetary payments • Teacher Standards that define and promote teacher competency and professionalism through expectations about teachers’ knowledge, competences and attributes, and desirable level of performance • Teacher Accountability, the principle that teachers are accountable for their performance and quality of their teaching as a key component of enhancing learning • School Governance as a crucial factor in both teacher motivation, morale, performance, and retention, and therefore learner performance and education outcomes. OECD TALIS The conceptual map developed for TALIS 2018 is considered in terms of two dimensions: focus and level. The first of the two dimensions (focus) is based on the extent to which a theme is mainly concerned with professional characteristics or pedagogical practices of institutions or teachers. The second of the two dimensions (level) refers to whether the theme mainly operates and references institutions or teachers. Institutional level could be the school, or it could be the national or regional system the school is part of. The conceptual map combines school and system because human resource policies and practices can be enacted by either a school or a system, or they can be enacted by both school and system, depending on the school governance arrangements that are in place. The figure below maps the TALIS 2018 themes in relation to the dimensions of focus and level. 27 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Figure A4: Conceptual Mapping of Themes in TALIS 2018 Source: OECD TALIS 2018 Conceptual Framework The quadrants of the conceptual map shown above correspond to the five TALIS policy areas. The two themes in the lower-right quadrant—teachers’ instructional practices and teacher professional practices—correspond with the policy area concerned with effective teaching. The four themes in the lower-left quadrant – teacher education and initial preparation, teacher feedback and development, teacher self-efficacy, and teacher job satisfaction and motivation – can be linked to developing the attributes of teachers (developing teachers). The two themes in the upper-right quadrant—school leadership and school climate—have ties with aspects of school effectiveness, while the theme in the upper-left quadrant—human resource issues and stakeholder relations – is concerned with the two policies areas of “attracting teachers” and “retaining teachers.” Figure A5: Correspondence between TALIS 2018 Conceptual Map and TALIS Policy Areas Source: OECD TALIS 2018 Conceptual Framework 28 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations OECD PISA The OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) will be a key source of data for the analysis going forward, particularly given Bulgaria’s participation across multiple waves of the assessment between 2000 and 2018. PISA is also a critical source of information on how features of context relate to student achievement. For these reasons, the PISA questionnaire framework also informs the proposed analytical framework presented above. The diagram below demonstrates the relationship between student background constructs, schooling constructs, and non-cognitive and meta-cognitive constructs that are measured through the PISA background questionnaires. Of particular interest are the schooling constructs in the center of the diagram, which relate to educational processes on different levels (system, school, and classroom). Those processes are closely linked to the three teacher policy domains presented in the proposed analytical framework. For example, the PISA context questionnaires provide a valuable source of information on teacher competences and practices, as well as school learning environment and system governance issues. 29 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Figure A6: PISA 2018 Questionnaire Modules Source: OECD PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework IEA PIRLS The IEA’s Progress on International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) is conducted every five years since 2001 and is recognized as the global standard for assessment trends in reading achievement at the fourth grade. Bulgaria has participated in each wave of PIRLS since the assessment was first established. As such, the data on reading achievement and on contexts for reading literacy will be used in connection with the proposed analytical framework for teacher policy in Bulgaria. Students in the fourth year of schooling typically have gained most of their reading skills at school and at home. As a result, community, school, classroom, and home environments that support each other can 30 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations create extremely effective climates for learning and literacy development. The PIRLS context questionnaire framework covers five broad areas: • National and community contexts, including teachers and teacher education, as well as monitoring curriculum implementation. • Home contexts, including parental expectations, academic socialization, and home reading support. • School contexts, including school composition, instruction affected by resource shortages, teacher working conditions and job satisfaction, principal leadership, school emphasis on academic success; and disciplinary environment and school climate. • Classroom contexts, including teacher preparation and experience, classroom resources, instructional time and engagement, and classroom assessment. • Student characteristics and attitudes towards learning, including student readiness to learn and motivation. The PIRLS assessment framework and context questionnaires have informed the development of the proposed framework, and the underlying PIRLS data will be used as part of the analysis going forward. IEA TIMSS TIMSS, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), is a flagship study of the IEA that assesses student achievement in mathematics and science at fourth and eight grades. As with PIRLS above, the TIMSS assessment frameworks and context questionnaires have informed the development of the proposed framework for teacher policy in Bulgaria. The TIMSS assessment framework is also predicated on the recognition that community, school, classroom and home environments support each other in practice and are closely linked in providing effective climates for learning. As such, the TIMSS context questionnaires also include the same five broad areas included in PIRLS: national and community contexts, home contexts, school contexts, classroom contexts, and student characteristics and attitudes towards learning. Importantly, the TIMSS framework and questionnaires also include several elements of particular interest for teacher policy, including teacher education and preparation, monitoring of curriculum implementation, teacher availability and retention, teacher shortages (if applicable) and impact on instruction, principal leadership, teacher expectations for academic performance, teacher collaboration, school climate, instructional time and engagement, and classroom assessment practices. The data from these constructs of interest will be analyzed in detail in connection with the three teacher policy domains presented in the proposed framework. IEA ICCS The IEA’s International Civic and Citizenship Education Study (ICCS) has been conducted twice (in 2009 and 2016), focused on monitoring trends in civic knowledge and engagement among students enrolled in the eighth grade. This study is premised on the principle that educational research should focus on more than students’ ability to learn mathematics, science, and literacy, while also contributing to a more holistic goal. In an increasingly globalized world, the United Nations, with its declaration of the Sustainable Development Goals, has also acknowledged the vital importance of global citizenship education. 31 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 6. Analytical Framework for Teaching Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations Bulgaria also participated in both waves of this study. Therefore, it is a valuable resource for both the analytical framework and the underlying data sources. It is particularly relevant given that the ICCS provides important information on citizen engagement and civic education within Europe, with detailed questionnaires related to European identity, perceptions of Europe and its future, mobility within Europe, and European cooperation. These are important elements for Bulgaria as an EU Member State. As with PIRLS and TIMSS, the ICCS also is based on an assessment framework that recognizes the multiple levels of influence and cooperation within a student’s learning environment, including in the home, the classroom, the school, and the local and wider communities. The framework includes context questionnaires that take such contextual influences to be antecedents (e.g. through historical factors and policies that shape how civics and citizenship learning take place) or processes (e.g. forces which contemporaneously shape civic and citizenship education). The diagram below shows the relationship between these constructs and the distribution of constructs across levels. The constructs pertaining to wider community and school/classroom will be most relevant for the teacher policy analytical framework in Bulgaria and for the subsequent data analysis. For example, context questionnaires cover several topics of particular interest for teacher policy in Bulgaria, including teacher experience with different types of teaching methods, teacher self-efficacy and need for professional development, teacher practices and organization of instructional time, teacher participation in non-teaching school tasks, school climate and disciplinary environment, among other topics. Figure A6: PISA 2018 Questionnaire Modules Source: IEA 2018 32 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria ANNEX 7 METHODOLOGY FOR SELECTION OF SYSTEMIC COUNTRY COMPARATORS FOR TEACHERS’ POLICY IN BULGARIA 1 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria 19BG04 Bulgaria: A Roadmap to Teachers’ Policy Development and Reform Component I: Analytical policy review Selection of Systemic Country Comparisons for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria Draft proposal for the selection of three systemic country comparisons and comparator cases March 24, 2020 2 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria Table of Contents List of abbreviations ................................................................................................................................ 4 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 5 Selection of three Systemic country comparators.................................................................................. 6 Selection stage 1: Education context is similar to the education context in Bulgaria ........................ 6 Selection stage 2: Average student results are high and growing ...................................................... 7 Selection stage 3: Countries with active teacher policies addressing key challenges that Bulgaria faces .................................................................................................................................................. 10 Teacher Policy Cases ............................................................................................................................. 15 Selected References .............................................................................................................................. 17 Annex 1. Student assessment results from PISA 2018, PIRLS 2016 and TIMSS 2015 ........................... 18 Annex 2. Long term trends in PISA results by OECD ............................................................................. 19 Annex 3. Variation in reading results among and between schools, PISA 2018 (OECD) ...................... 20 Annex 4. Teacher Policy Cases from the European Commission report ‘Teachers and School Leaders in Schools as Learning Organizations’ (EC, 2018) ................................................................................. 22 3 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria List of abbreviations EU European Union ITE initial teacher education MOES Ministry of Education and Science PD professional development program PIRLS Progress in International Reading Literacy Study PISA Program for International Student Assessment SES socio-economic status SRSS Structural Reform Support Service TPT Teacher Policy Taskforce TALIS Teaching and Learning International Survey TIMMS Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study 4 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria Introduction In Bulgaria, policy ambitions on education and human capital are high, which is in contrast with the lack of systemic improvement of student results. There are still challenges to deal with and other countries to learn from (WB 2019). This note provides an approach to select European Union (EU) comparators countries on teacher policies. It proposes a short list of countries that are relevant for Bulgaria according to a designated criteria. This contributes to the analytical framework1 regarding teacher policies and workforce planning analysis in Bulgaria in line with Component 1 of the Agreement signed between the EC-SRSS and the World Bank (“Teaching workforce policy note and recommendations”). This document contributes to Section 4 of the Analytical Framework for Teacher Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations. Following the consultation process on the proposed below selection for systemic comparators and final decision of the Teacher Policy Taskforce (TPT) this will be integrated into the main document, leading to the development of the outline and final policy note. The analytical review of Bulgaria’s workforce teacher policy developments and outcomes will apply a comparative analysis and will use examples from other countries to inform and strengthen policies, and advise on programs for improvement. More specifically: • Systemic Country Comparisons: three relevant EU-countries will be chosen for systemic comparison of teacher workforce policies with Bulgaria, following a request from MOES. Those systemic comparators will be used to explore relevant experiences and practices addressing system level policies on teachers, inform key hypothesis related to identified challenges on Bulgaria teacher policy context and policy goals, and to map the system elements. The analytical approach will follow the overall framework for analysis2 to inform learning where teachers (and principals) play a central role in boosting student performance. • Teacher Policy Cases: In addition, teacher policy cases from a larger selection of countries and relevant to a particular aspect of teacher policy would be included in the final World Bank report. The analytical framework, the international comparisons, and the subsequent policy questions and analysis will provide these further teacher policy “cases” – with targeted examples from other countries to help Bulgaria excel in selected policy areas. These are not following the selection process of the three systemic country comparisons presented below and will be proposed based on policy review work and analytical evidences coming out of the analysis on teacher workforce. Teacher policy cases will include other EU and non-EU countries around the world (e.g. Singapore and Japan). Examples of an initial selection of such cases are provided at the end of the note. 1 Analytical Framework for Teacher Workforce Policy Assessment and Recommendations, March 2020 2 Ibid. 5 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria Selection of three Systemic country comparators Approach: The proposed selection process of systemic country comparators is based on three criteria, developed by WB team based on the project missions work and reflections, follow-up activities and analytical work focused on EU and international examples for policies targeting teachers. It is based on international evidence from EU reports, the international study on teachers TALIS (‘Teaching and Learning International Survey’) and the international student assessment studies PISA (‘Program for International Student Assessment’, targeting 15-year-old students), PIRLS (‘Progress in International Reading Literacy Study’, targeting 4th grade students) and TIMMS (‘Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study’ targeting 4th and/or 8th grade students). The selection consists of three stages as summarized in Figure 1. Figure 1. Selection of comparators for Bulgaria All EU countries similar context: CZE, EST, HRV, HUN, LTU, LVA, POL, 1 ROU, SVK, SVN high/growing student results: 2 EST, SVN, CZE (+ POL, LTU) effective teacher policies: 3 EST, SVN, CZE The selection process of the system country comparators starts with all EU countries. The selection process consists of the following three stages: 1. the education context is similar with the context in Bulgaria 2. student performance is high and/or growing 3. the countries have active teacher policies on the challenges Bulgaria faces This selection process results in a selection of three system comparators: Estonia, Slovenia and the Czech Republic. These three systemic country comparators are countries of which teacher policies processes and system reforms can function as an example to inspire Bulgaria’s teacher policies. The selection stages and the detailed results are described in the section below. Selection stage 1: the education context is similar to the education context in Bulgaria Because the selection of systemic country comparators is intended to be aligned closely with Bulgaria’s context and vision for education reform, the first stage of selection for systemic country comparators prioritizes countries with a similar context. The countries with most similar contexts are 6 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria the Central and Еastern European countries with a similar history (ex-socialist countries) and similar education systems. These are countries where the school context is similar to that in Bulgaria in terms of education system structure and history: (i) modern teaching styles evolving from traditionally strong focus on theoretical and teacher centered learning and education provision characterized by large networks of providers that require optimization due to migration and demographic flows; (ii) governance models in education evolved from traditionally centralized systems; (iii) dynamic external enabling environment with significant policy changes reflecting public policies, economy and public wealth ; and (iv) significant cohorts of teachers with basic teacher education obtained during the period before policy reforms and political changes (socialist period) requiring systemic support for transforming from traditional teacher and content centered approach to a learner-centered model. These are context variables that characterize the Bulgarian education context and are relevant elements for teacher policies. The Eastern European countries make strong comparators due to similar political and economy conditions and the specific education policy change processes from the last decades. The teacher policy development and the associated processes in these countries would be of great interest for Bulgarian policymakers and education practitioners. All those countries are experiencing similar relevant challenges such as high rates of emigration and brain drain because citizens move out to other countries (EU, 2019). This selection stage excludes the top performing Asian countries on student international assessments as comparators, like Singapore, South Korea and Japan. While these countries do provide useful examples of teacher policy cases that would be treated separately (see below), these countries and their education systems operate in very different contexts from Bulgaria. For example, these top performing Asian countries are test oriented, highly selective, with a large market of extra private tutoring and test training. The same holds for the other European countries; their context is not as similar to the Bulgarian context as the context of the Central & Eastern European countries (in terms of education system, education policy, teacher workforce and other context variables).3 This doesn’t exclude using the other countries for specific examples of system elements in need, as this approach proposes below, for targeted teacher policy ‘cases’. We restrict the selection to the 11 Central and Eastern EU countries with a similar history and education system that are member of the European Union. Next to Bulgaria (BGR), these are the following 10 countries - the Czech Republic (CZE), Estonia (EST), Croatia (HRV), Hungary (HUN), Lithuania (LTU), Latvia (LVA), Poland (POL), Romania (ROU), the Slovak Republic (SVK), and Slovenia (SVN). Selection stage 2: the average student results are high and growing The foundational principle underlying the analytical approach of teacher policies and related outcomes is that learning is at the core of all teacher policy development and implementation processes. In line with this principle, this stage prioritizes countries with high and growing average student learning outcomes based on the international assessments. Even though learning outcomes are driven by many factors, above and beyond teacher policies, Bulgaria stands to benefit from in- 3 In a previous version all EU countries were included in the selection, but the World Bank team concluded that the education context of Western European countries is too different in many cases to make relevant systemic country comparisons for Bulgaria. There is also no need to include Western European countries because there are enough top performing Central and Eastern European Member States that can function as systematic country comparators. 7 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria depth knowledge of teacher policies in such countries and how those policies may be contributing to such high and growing learning outcomes. We use the international student assessment studies PISA, PIRLS and TIMSS to compare student learning outcomes as well as contextual features between countries. These studies use standardized tests that are comparable between countries and over time, in addition to extensive contextual questionnaires of students, teachers, and school leaders. The 11 selected Central and Eastern EU countries (including Bulgaria) participate in almost all of these international assessment studies, in addition to other international surveys (without standardized tests) including TALIS and ICCS. This participation provides a relevant source of data both for cross-country analysis and international comparisons. For a detailed overview of the latest participation in these studies, see Table 1. Table 1: Participation of the selected 11 Central and Eastern EU members in the international studies on education TALIS 2018 PISA 2018 PIRLS 2016 TIMSS 2019 ICCS 2016 Bulgaria BGR x x x x x Croatia HRV x x x x x Czech Republic CZE x x x x x Estonia EST x x x Hungary HUN x x x x Latvia LVA x x x x Lithuania LTU x x x x x Poland POL x x x x Romania ROU x x x x Slovakia SVK x x x x x Slovenia SVN x x x x x Bulgaria participates regularly in PISA, PIRLS and TIMSS. In PIRLS (grade 4), Bulgaria is amongst the high performers, but with relatively lower results for 15-year-old students in PISA. This significant variation in performance signals important differences in the competencies measured by the respective assessments and how the curriculum and content are taught in Bulgarian schools over the different education levels. The trends in student results for 15 years old students in Bulgaria are illustrated in Figure 2. This figure shows the average student results for reading, math and science from 2003/2006 to 2018, all based on PISA (OECD). The figure shows that the student results in PISA are lower than the OECD average, for all subject and all years. The figure also shows that the trend in student results is not positive in Bulgaria, but flat (see Annex 2, from Schleicher, 2018). The results in 2018 are even relatively low on all three topics, compared to earlier cohorts of Bulgarian students. 8 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria Figure 2. Trends in PISA results in reading, mathematics and science for Bulgarian students The ambition on learning outcomes and specific student results for Bulgaria should be (1) higher averages to lift all students and all types of schools up and closer to OECD average, and (2) stable positive trends for Bulgarian students. We are looking for comparator countries from the selected pool with higher achievement and/or growing performance of students over the years. The selected European countries perform different on the international student assessment studies PISA, PIRLS and TIMSS. Estonia is the country with the highest results in PISA (but did not participate in PIRLS and TIMSS). Poland, Slovenia and the Czech Republic are also high performers, as assessed in PISA, PIRLS and TIMSS. These countries are good comparators, with average student results that are above the results of Bulgaria and most European countries. Four of the selected European countries show mixed results (high on PIRLS/TIMSS and low on PISA or vice versa): Latvia, Hungary, Lithuania and Bulgaria. The other countries, Croatia, Slovakia and Romania have PISA, PIRLS and TIMSS results that are below average. Table 2 shows the countries and categories (column 2). More detailed results are available in Annex 1. In addition to the average assessment results, improving trends in student results are used in this second selection stage. An improving trend in student results gives an indication of the effectiveness of education policies during the previous years. The selection approach prioritizes comparator countries with growing results over the last years, not for countries where results declined. This means that countries with positive trends in student assessment (in PISA, PIRLS and TIMSS) are observed and selected. Table 2 presents an overview of the trends in student results. This table is based on the recent trends in PISA, PIRLS and TIMSS (see Annex 1). Table 2. Average student results and trends in student results, based on international studies PISA, PIRLS and TIMSS 2009-2018 9 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria country student results trends in student results relevant comparator Romania below average flat no, low results & flat Slovakia below average unstable no, low & unstable results Croatia below average flat / growth no, results below average Bulgaria mixed flat Lithuania mixed growth maybe, mixed but growing results Hungary mixed unstable / growth no, mixed results & unstable Latvia mixed unstable no, mixed results & unstable Czech Republic above average growth yes, high & growing results Slovenia above average growth yes, high & growing results Poland above average flat maybe, high but flat results Estonia above average growth yes, high & growing results Table 2 shows (i) that most of the countries have a positive trend in student results and (ii) that there are no countries with a negative trend. The trends are positive in the Czech Republic, Estonia, Lithuania and Slovenia. Latvia and Slovakia do not make good comparators, because their trends are a combination of negative and unstable trends. There are 3 comparators (Table 2) with high and growing student results: Estonia, Slovenia and the Czech Republic. In addition, there are two other countries that might be relevant: Poland, with stable high results, and Lithuania with average but growing results. This means that there are five countries that would be relevant comparators. In selection stage 3, the analysis assesses whether these countries have active teacher policies related to Bulgaria’s key challenges in education. Selection stage 3: Countries with active teacher policies addressing key challenges that Bulgaria faces The third and last selection stage narrows the range of comparator countries to those with active teacher policies on issues that are relevant for Bulgarian education. The national data, previous teacher policy analysis (World Bank 2013), and results of international studies mentioned above show that Bulgaria faces a series of challenges related to the teaching workforce, which directly affect the learning outcomes of students, as well as the management and planning of the teaching workforce. These key challenges are: (1) the increasing likelihood of teacher shortages due to the high percentage of teachers above 50 years old and relatively low attractiveness of the teacher profession, (2) the career path and competences of school principals, (3) large differences in student results between schools, and (4) the competences of the current teacher workforce, particularly in light of the Bulgaria’s vision for transitioning to competency-based teaching and learning. The analysis presented below summarizes the selected countries which have active teacher policies for these three core challenges. 10 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria • Topic 1: Risk of teacher shortages Figure 3. Percentage teachers aged 50 years and above for EU-countries, by Eurostat based on 2017 data4 Bulgaria has a relatively old teacher workforce, compared to other countries, meaning that Bulgaria’s teacher workforce is disproportionately close to retirement age. Figure 3 shows that almost half of the teacher population was 50 years or older in 2017. This is confirmed by recent national data that show that 44,000 of the approximately 91,000 teachers in Bulgaria are above 50 years of age. This percentage is high compared to other EU-countries (see also Figure 3). This specific age profile of the teacher workforce means that over half of current teachers will retire in the next 10 to 20 years. Without careful management and planning of student demographic trends (which are also declining) as well as new teachers entering the profession, this high share of teachers nearing retirement could potentially lead to a shrinking teacher workforce and widespread teacher shortages. The relatively old teacher population makes Bulgaria a country with one of the highest expected teacher declines. Complicating factors might be (i) that staff shortage is not equally distributed among schools in Bulgaria but concentrates on schools with a disadvantaged student population, and (ii) that the number of students is also declining over time in some regions. The analytical work and data consolidation effort will follow this specific context to observe the aspects of existing shortage and its links to aging teacher population. The demographics of the student population vis-à-vis the teacher population will be observed along with special distribution and context aspects as specified in the framework. 4 Retrieved at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/4187653/10085877/Primary+to+upper+secondary+school+teacher s+by+age/54a0c0eb-ca52-03cd-60b5-c456d5afa5f4?t=1569427291451 11 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria In the perception of Bulgarian principals, staff shortage is not an obstacle to providing instruction at school. Both the PISA and the TALIS studies show that Bulgarian principals view the amount and quality of teaching and assisting staff less often an obstacle to instruction than principals in other countries (Pisa dataset, 2018; TALIS report, p. 108). This will be further analyzed by the WB team, in relation with other countries in the region and countries with similar demographics of teachers and students. • Topic 2: Career path and competences of school principals A second challenge for Bulgarian education is the career path and competences of school principals. The principal is one of the key actors when it comes to school quality and school improvement (EU, 2018). Their instructional leadership and management of the teacher workforce at the school level is a key factor for success, because it affects teacher motivation and the capacity to drive student learning, as well as supporting collaborative working environments, distributed leadership, networking opportunities, productive engagement with parents, and a supportive culture of schools as learning organizations can enhance teaching. Evidence from TALIS shows that principals in Bulgaria received less satisfying initial training than principals in other countries. Only 1/3 of the Bulgarian principals had a formal training program before entering the job as a principal, which is low compared to the OECD average of 54%. And only 20% of the Bulgarian principals had an instructional training program, which is also low compared to the OECD average of 54% (OECD, 2019). Bulgarian principals might also face challenges with policy implementation, with evaluation and improvement or with human resource management. The Bulgarian system is concentrating workforce management responsibilities on school/preschool principals having them practically filtering the access of teacher professionals to the system. The WB team-led ongoing analytical review of teacher policy is indicating significant challenges and needs associated with principals and their role for the workforce mix, its management and planning. This topic will add to the teacher specific list above when analyzing comparators. Slovenia introduced several policy measures to support principals. Their policy measures include (see EU, 2018): - Training, licensing and rewarding school leaders (principals). Change management is a compulsory element of this training for all school leaders (principals). Every year, the competences of school leaders are evaluated by the school councils and effect the financial rewards of school leaders (principals). - Stimulate teacher leadership and use teachers' talents and competences for change management and school development, as part of the project ‘Leading and Managing Innovative Learning Environments’. - The introduction of a mentoring program for school leaders (principals) by the National School for Leadership in Education. All newly appointed school leaders get an experienced mentor for 1 year and meet with other participants and their mentors. Estonia started a national professional development (PD) program for school leaders (principals). This program contributes to the improvement of schools and to the reduction of (undesired) differences between schools. The objective of this PD program is support school leaders with mentoring and to support internal mentoring systems at the mentors' own schools (EU, 2018). There is also a specific PD program for new principals that consists of seminars, visits to other schools (in Estonia and abroad), and meetings with experts and practitioners. 12 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria • Topic 3: School differences and school improvement A third challenge for Bulgarian education is school improvement. In PISA, schools vary in student performance in Bulgaria, there are very well performing and very poorly performing schools. The differences in average test scores between schools are in the top 5 in the world and the second highest in the EU (see Annex 3). Part of these differences are caused by systemic differences between schools in terms of tracking (level and general versus vocational tracks) and segregation by socio-economic status (SES) of the student population, but there also seems to be a need for school development or improvement plans, especially for weaker schools. There is low performance and a room for improvement in a substantial part of the Bulgarian schools, in terms of student results. The differences in performance between Bulgarian schools can also have other reasons. Among those are the tracking, the segregation or the unequal distribution of high performing teachers among schools. The ongoing policy process analysis and MOES datasets analysis will provide more insight on possible explanations and underlying mechanisms. Figure 4. Differences in average test scores between schools with highest - lowest percentages of high achievers (source: PISA 2018) Differences between schools PISA 2018 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 BGR CZE EST LTU LVA MNE POL ROU SVK SVN Math Reading Science Figure 4 shows the differences between school in average test scores in mathematics, reading and sciences for Bulgaria compared with the selected Central and Eastern EU countries. It shows the difference in PISA scores between the schools with the highest and the schools with the lowest percentage of high achievers. The differences are large in Bulgaria and the Czech Republic and much lower in Slovakia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Estonia and Poland. These last three countries managed to reduce differences between schools and to improve the PISA results at their low performing schools. Data on the variation between schools (in reading) for other EU countries are available in Annex 3. Again, Slovenia is a compelling comparator because this country introduced measures to support school improvement, in terms of improving student results (see EU, 2018). These are: - The introduction of school development teams. These ‘teams are expected to act as agents of change within their schools and are trained both in the content of the changes introduced and in change management’. - Encourage team learning and collaboration at schools, as well as between schools. Elements of this policy are supporting teams and networks and offering team training. Especially interesting are the ‘Networks of Learning Schools’. These networks consist of six to eight 13 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria schools. School development teams work on school improvement, meet regularly and receive training in order to act as capable change agents in their schools. Regarding school differences and school improvement, the Czech Republic started a project to support teachers in developing the basic literacies: reading literacy, mathematical literacy and digital literacy & computational thinking. The project aims to foster a mutual view of quality in education across the school board and other relevant stakeholders, centered around student results. It also encourages reflective and collaborative practice among teachers. And it covers schools and pre- schools (EU, 2018). This program did not result (yet) in a decrease in differences between schools, but it might be interesting for Bulgaria in order to develop learning centered policies at the school level. • Topic 4: Competences of the teacher workforce Competences of the teacher workforce are a fourth challenge in Bulgaria. The TALIS research shows that a relatively high percentage of Bulgarian teachers reports to need professional development (22% of the Bulgarian teachers, compared to the OECD average of 14%). TALIS also shows some deficits in specific teacher competences for part of the teacher workforce in Bulgaria. For some subjects, there seem to be deficits in basic teacher education of the teacher workforce (like classroom management, student assessment and working with mixed abilities). An example of this is shown in Figure 5, where a relatively low percentage of Bulgarian teachers (48%) report that their basic education included student behavior and classroom management (source: TALIS, 2018). The reason for this might be that the teacher education programs under socialist rule were of low quality and not selective, as is suggested by Boyadjieva (2013). Following the new legislation (2016) Bulgaria started an intensive effort of enhancing teachers’ professional qualification levels through continuing professional development. This is one of the key policy steps of the MOES trying to address the need for updating the learning centered approached in the classrooms. In the same time the basic teacher education programs have not changed and MOES is looking for working models on how to incentivize developments in this area given the existing autonomy of universities. Figure 5. Percentage of teachers that reported that basic teacher education included student behavior and classroom management for Bulgaria and other Eastern EU countries (source: TALIS, 2018). Poland might be a possible example of interest to demonstrate policy steps addressing the need to improve teaching competences. This country introduced standards of teacher education that are based on learning outcomes. These new standards (introduced in 2012) aimed to ‘enhance the quality 14 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria and importance of pedagogical practice and to improve the link of theory with practice’ (EU, 2018). However, in the beginning this program suffered from several shortcomings: the absence of recruitment criteria for teachers, the low quality of candidates entering Initial Teacher Education (ITE), outdated programs and the low social prestige of ITE qualifications (EU, 2018). This means that Poland might not be an ideal comparator. New concepts and changes to solve these shortcomings were introduced in 2017, but it is too early to see effects on student results. Conclusion selection stage 3 This third and last selection stage narrows the range of comparator countries to those with active teacher policies on challenges in Bulgarian education. Figure 6 shows the countries with active teacher policies for each of the four topics: (a) risk of teacher shortage, (b) career path and competences of school principals, (c) differences in student results between schools, and (d) the competences of the current teacher workforce). Three countries have active teacher policies on at least two of the four challenges: Estonia, Slovenia and the Czech Republic. These three countries make good systemic comparator countries. The WB team propose to use these 3 countries as subject of in-depth analyses from the perspective of teacher workforce policies. Figure 6. Countries with active teacher policies for each of the challenges in Bulgarian education • Estonia • Slovenia • Czech • Estonia Republic 1. Teacher 2. School shortage principals 4. Teacher 3. School competences improvement • Poland • Slovenia • Czech Republic Teacher Policy Cases Teacher policy cases from a larger selection of countries (beyond the 3 systemic country comparisons) and relevant to particular aspects of teacher policy framework would also be used in the analysis going forward. The team will research, select and use additional examples from other EU countries, as well as countries outside the European Union. The analytical framework will guide further international comparative investigation and identify a range of policy options relevant for analysis in Bulgaria. Based on this the cases will be selected to address specific aspects of the analysis and policy tasks such as but not limited to: • Governance: Which country has institutionalized a systemic approach to promote institutional leadership in support of teachers? This will include teacher preparation, selection, deployment, evaluation, incentives and motivation. • Workforce Lifecycle: Which country has a strong induction process to onboard new teachers so that no new teacher feels alone or without support? 15 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria • Community and Connections: Which country best prepares and supports teachers to harness diversity? • Teacher Competences and Standards: Which country has clearly defined standards and expectations for teacher knowledge and classroom practices? The alignment between the analytical framework, the international comparisons, and the analysis will provide for further teacher policy “cases” – targeted examples from other countries that excel in select areas of policy relevant for Bulgaria. Those countries constitute the broader group of good performers. This will include the following: - experiences through EU funding and initiatives under SRSS of Lithuania and Ireland; - examples of specific policy measures that respond to the policy elements observed by the teacher workforce analysis and are prioritized as relevant for Bulgaria; - examples of specific policy measures of countries that MOES and EU experts will prioritize during the consultation period. Annex 4 shows some preliminary examples for such policy cases, based on an inventory of the ET 2020 Working Groups of the EU (EU, 2018). Those initial examples will be a subject of additional check, exploration and final decision and supplemented by other examples. 16 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria Selected References Boyadjieva, P.A. (2013) Admissions Policies as a Mechanism for Social Engineering: The Case of the Bulgarian Communist Regime. In: Comparative Education Review, Vol. 57, No. 3, Special Issue on Fair Access to Higher Education (August 2013), pp. 503-526 Breeding, Mary; Trembley, Andrew; Danchev, Plamen; Peeva, Evgenia; Trayanov, Trayan; Kinkina, Maria; Kalkanova, Tatyana. 2013. SABER teacher country report: Bulgaria 2013 (Bulgarian). Systems Approach for Better Education Results (SABER) country report; 2013. Washington DC : World Bank. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/569081468020329745/SABER-teacher-country- report-Bulgaria-2013 Eurydice (2018) Teaching Careers in Europe: Access, Progression and Support. Eurydice report. European Commission (2019) PISA 2018 and the EU; striving for social fairness through education. Brussels: European Commission. European Commission (2018) Education and training monitor 2018. Country analysis. Brussels: EU. European Commission (2019) Demographic Scenarios for the EU, Luxembourg., European Commission (2018) Teachers and school leaders in schools as learning organisations. Guiding principles for policy development in school education. ET 2020 Working Groups, https://www.schooleducationgateway.eu/downloads/Governance/2018-wgs4-learning- organisations_en.pdf OECD (2019), TALIS 2018 Results (Volume 1): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en. OECD (2020) TALIS 2018 Compare Your Country. Retrieved Jan 2020 from https://www.oecd.org/education/talis/talis-2018-compare-your-country.htm. OECD (2019) Country Note Bulgaria: results from TALIS 2018. OECD. OECD (2019) Country Note Bulgaria: results from PISA 2018. OECD. OECD (2019) PISA 2018. Schleicher, A. (2019) PISA 2018: Insights and interpretations. Paris: OECD. World Bank (2019) A Policy Agenda to Boost Human Capital in Bulgaria. Policy Brief Discussing the Human Capital Index for Bulgaria. WB, March 2019. World Bank (2019) Migration and Brain Drain: Europe and Central Asia Update. Washington: World Bank. 17 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria Annex 1. Student assessment results from PISA 2018, PIRLS 2016 and TIMSS 2015 PISA 2018 results (https://www.oecd.org/pisa/Combined_Executive_Summaries_PISA_2018.pdf) Mean score in PISA 2018 Reading Mathematics Science Mean Mean Mean OECD average 487 489 489 Estonia 523 523 530 Poland 512 516 511 Slovenia 495 509 507 Czech Republic 490 499 497 Croatia 479 464 472 Latvia 479 496 487 Hungary 476 481 481 Lithuania 476 481 482 Slovak Republic 458 486 464 Romania 428 430 426 Bulgaria 420 436 424 Information on data for Cyprus: https://oe.cd/cyprus-disclaimer Notes: Values that are statistically significant are marked in bold (see Annex A3). Long-term trends are reported for the longest available period since PISA 2000 for reading, PISA 2003 for mathematics and PISA 2006 for science. Results based on reading performance are reported as missing for Spain (see Annex A9). The OECD average does not include Spain in these cases. Countries and economies are ranked in descending order of the mean reading score in PISA 2018. Source: OECD, PISA 2018 Database, Tables I.B1.10, I.B1.11, I.B1.12, I.B1.26 and I.B1.27. PIRLS 2016 results: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/pirls2016/international-results/pirls/student-achievement/ TIMSS 2015 results: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/international-results/timss-2015/mathematics/student- achievement/ http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/international-results/timss-2015/mathematics/student- achievement/ 18 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria Annex 2. Long term trends in PISA results by the OECD PISA 2018 Results (Volume I) - © OECD 2019 Chapter 9 Figure I.9.1 Curvilinear trajectories of average performance in reading across PISA assessments Version 3 - Last updated: 02-Dec-2019 Disclaimer: http://oe.cd/disclaimer Figure I.9.1 Curvilinear trajectories of average performance in reading across PISA assessments Direction and trajectory of trend in mean performance Positive, but flattening Countries/economies with a positive average Increasingly positive Steadily positive (less positive over more recent years) 560 530 520 PISA reading score PISA reading score PISA reading score 540 520 510 510 500 520 500 490 500 490 480 trend 480 480 470 460 470 460 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 Jordan (06) Estonia (06) Albania (01) Montenegro (06) Macao (China) (03) Portugal (00) Chile (01) Peru (01) Russia (00) Colombia (06) Poland (00) Germany (00) Qatar (06) Israel (02) Romania (06) U-shaped Hump-shaped Flat (more positive over more recent years) (more negative over more recent years) 510 510 PISA reading score PISA reading score PISA reading score Countries/economies with no significant 500 490 490 480 470 470 460 average trend 450 450 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 Argentina (01) Austria (00) Italy (00) OECD average-23 (00) Latvia (00) Czech Republic (00) Bulgaria (01) Japan (00) Belgium (00) Luxembourg (03) Ireland (00) Canada (00) Mexico (00) Greece (00) Switzerland (00) Slovenia (06) Croatia (06) Norway (00) Hong Kong (China) (02) Chinese Taipei (06) Uruguay (03) Denmark (00) United States (00) Hungary (00) Turkey (03) France (00) Indonesia (01) Negative, but flattening Increasingly negative Steadily negative (less negative over more recent years) 520 520 540 PISA reading score PISA reading score PISA reading score Countries/economies with a negative 510 500 520 500 480 490 500 480 460 480 average trend 470 440 460 460 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 2018 Korea (00) Australia (00) Sweden (00) Netherlands (03) Finland (00) Thailand (01) Iceland (00) New Zealand (00) Notes: Figures are for illustrative purposes only. Countries and economies are grouped according to the overall direction of their trend (the sign and significance of the average three-year trend) and to the rate of change in the direction of their trend (the sign and significance of the curvature in the estimate of quadratic trends) (see Annex A7). Only countries and economies with data from at least five PISA reading assessments are included. Not all countries and economies can compare their students’ performance over the same period. For each country/economy, the base year, starting from which reading results can be compared, is indicated in parentheses next to the country’s/economy’s name (“00” = 2000, “01” = 2001, etc.). Both the overall direction and the change in the direction may be affected by the period considered. OECD average-23 refers to the average of all OECD countries with valid data in all seven assessments; Austria, Chile, Estonia, Israel, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States are not included in this average. Source: OECD, PISA 2018 Database, Table I.B1.10. 19 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria Annex 3. Variation in reading results among and between schools, PISA 2018 (OECD) PISA 2018 Results (Volume II) - © OECD 2019 Chapter 4 Figure II.4.1 Variation in reading performance between and within schools Version 2 - Last updated: 02-Dec-2019 Disclaimer: http://oe.cd/disclaimer Figure II.4.1 Variation in reading performance between and within schools Within-school variation Between-school variation Israel Lebanon Netherlands United Arab Emirates Bulgaria Germany Slovak Republic Hungary Czech Republic Turkey Qatar Italy Belgium Serbia Romania Slovenia Argentina Switzerland Japan Luxembourg Singapore North Macedonia Brunei Darussalam Peru Hong Kong (China) Brazil Malta Uruguay B-S-J-Z (China) Croatia Panama Lithuania Chinese Taipei Korea France Colombia OECD average Greece Ukraine Dominican Republic OECD average 71% Thailand Russia Moldova Macao (China) Indonesia Chile Morocco Montenegro Jordan Philippines Belarus Costa Rica Kazakhstan Australia Malaysia Saudi Arabia Bosnia and Herzegovina OECD average 29% United States Georgia Mexico Albania Latvia Kosovo United Kingdom Sweden Poland Estonia New Zealand Portugal Canada Denmark Ireland Norway Baku (Azerbaijan) Iceland Finland % 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 % Note: In this chapter, all analyses are restricted to schools with the modal ISCED level for 15-year-old students (see Annex A3). Countries and economies are rank ed in descending order of the between-school variation in reading performance, as a percentage of the total variation in performance across OECD countries. Source: OECD, PISA 2018 Database, Table II.B1.4.1. 20 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria 21 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria Annex 4. Teacher Policy Cases from the European Commission report ‘Teachers and School Leaders in Schools as Learning Organizations’ (EC, 2018) Link to document: https://www.schooleducationgateway.eu/downloads/Governance/2018-wgs4- learning-organisations_en.pdf Teacher Education: Poland (p. 26) In Poland, new standards of teacher education based on learning outcomes were introduced in 2012 to enhance the quality and importance of pedagogical practice and to improve the link of theory with practice. Five years later a number of serious shortcomings were identified, including the absence of recruitment criteria for teachers, the low quality of candidates entering ITE, outdated programs and the low social prestige of ITE qualifications. Consequently, in April 2017, the Minister of Education set up a working group to assess the situation, prepare a concept and make recommendations for changes needed in teacher education. The group consists of representatives from the Ministry, a range of educational bodies and agencies, higher education institutions and others. Induction Training: Ireland (p. 38) In Ireland, Droichead (Irish for 'bridge') is an integrated induction framework for newly qualified teachers (NQTs). It reflects the importance of the induction phase on the teacher’s lifelong learning journey where the new teacher is formally welcomed into the profession of having completed Initial Teacher Education. It lays the foundations for subsequent professional growth and learning for the next phase of their career. Droichead includes both school-based and additional professional learning activities. The first step in the Droichead process is to establish a Professional Support Team (PST). This is a team of registered and experienced teachers who work collaboratively to support the novice teachers during the Droichead process and who support his or her entry into both the school and the profession. A National Induction Programme for Teachers (NIPT) Droichead Associate provides follow-up support and professional development to the support team, newly qualified teachers and the school staff. It is important that there is a whole-school approach to Droichead as each staff member will support beginning teachers in different ways; from a tea or coffee and informal chat in the staff room, to co-planning and sharing resources and ideas to a more structured approach involving observation and feedback. Droichead is a non-evaluative professional induction framework, which is markedly different from the traditional forms of post-qualification professional practice which applied in schools at primary (probation) and post-primary (post-qualification employment) levels in the past. The current model was launched in September 2016 and is planned to be the professional induction program for all NQTs by the school year 2020/2021. Schools will have an interim period to transition into this model. http://www.teachingcouncil.ie/en/Teacher-Education/Droichead/ School Leaders Mentoring: Estonia (p. 55, 56) In 2014, Estonia started a national professional training program, designed to create a pool of mentors whose expertise is channeled to support newly appointed school leaders. The objective of the program is twofold: to provide high-quality mentoring support to these school leaders and to promote internal mentoring systems at the mentors' own schools. There is a public competitive process to apply for the mentoring position. Applicants must have at least five years’ experience and demonstrate very high motivation. The training for mentors is carried out by a private company in cooperation with Innove, a non-profit foundation governed by the Estonian Ministry of Education and Research. Training for mentors 22 Funded by the European Union via the Structural Reform Support Programme and implemented by the World Bank in cooperation with the European Commission ANNEX 7. Methodology for Selection of Systemic Country Comparators for Teachers’ Policy in Bulgaria includes communication, needs analysis, coaching and feedback skills. There is a special development program to support the new principals during their first two years in the new position. It consists of eight two-day seminars, visits to schools, in Estonia and abroad, and meetings with experts and practitioners. Mentoring is a major component of the program. All participants are assigned a mentor who has graduated from the national mentoring program. Mentors and mentees are matched according to the mentees needs. They are both prepared for the cooperation and jointly determine an individualized agenda. The mentor is supposed to act as a critical friend to the principal and uses coaching skills. Mentor and mentee meet at least once a month and have additional sessions via e-mail, phone etc. Mentors' expenses are covered, and work remunerated. At least once a year mentors in the national pool meet to discuss their experiences and receive additional training. During the first two years, the program has offered mentors to 32 principals. The feedback shows that the relationship has been mutually beneficial. Inclusion and diversity: Romania (p. 21) In Romania, the Ministry of National Education has developed an action plan for desegregation and quality improvement in education, a public policy act that is intended to ban and eradicate any form of segregation in schools. One of the measures included in the plan is to change the law regarding school segregation, which will be enshrined in the initial education and continuous professional development of teachers, head teachers and other teaching staff. The action plan also comprises a revision of quality standards for schools on school desegregation, inclusive education and diversity. The legal basis for teacher salaries will be revised to introduce merit-based salary bonuses to teachers who record school progress of the most vulnerable groups of children in education. The Ministry is also seeking to develop broad partnerships with various educational partners for the implementation, and the monitoring of the implementation, of strategic measures included in the Action plan. Teacher Career Paths: Slovak Republic (p. 31) In the Slovak Republic, a teacher career system was introduced in 2009 to raise the quality and attractiveness of the profession, putting an emphasis on continuous professional growth. The system comprises four career stages (Novice teaching staff, Independent teaching staff, Teaching staff with a first attestation and Teaching staff with a second attestation). At the different stages the system also offers opportunities for horizontal specialization, including specific professional activities such as career counsellor, ICT coordinator or head of subject area, as well as leadership positions. The career system is currently being reviewed to build on strengths and address shortcomings. Among other proposals the government is considering stricter selection criteria for Initial Teacher Education, support for training (laboratory) schools closely linked to ITE faculties and a new incentive-based remuneration scheme for teachers. 23