Evaluation APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT October 10, 2018 This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by NORC at the University of Chicago. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | i APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA EVALUATION AND RESEARCH BASELINE REPORT FOR SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN MACHINGA AND BALAKA DISTRICTS – PART 1 Original Version: September 2, 2018 This Version: October 10, 2018 Prepared under Contract No.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 Cover photo credit: Alicia Menendez DISCLAIMER The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. This report was prepared at NORC at the University of Chicago by Dr. Alicia Menendez, Gregory Haugan, and Zoe Grotophorst. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS......................................................................................................................................................v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................6 EVALUATION QUESTIONS AND METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW............................................... 12 FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................................................... 18 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 55 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................. 56 ANNEX I: EVALUATION STATEMENT OF WORK .......................................................................... 59 ANNEX II: EVALUATION METHODS AND LIMITATIONS ............................................................ 73 ANNEX III: DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS AND IRB MATERIALS ................................. 89 ANNEX IV: ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS..................................................................................................138 ANNEX V: BALANCE BETWEEN TREATMENT AND CONTROL GROUPS..........................141 ANNEX VI: DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.................................................144 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | iii TABLE OF TABLES Table 1. Planned and Observed Student Sample .................................................................................... 15 Table 2. Planned and Observed Caregiver Sample ................................................................................ 16 Table 3. Student Sample, Summary Statistics.......................................................................................... 18 Table 4. Student Age, by Standard and Sex ............................................................................................. 20 Table 5. Student School Attendance ......................................................................................................... 22 Table 6. Percentage of Students with Disabilities, by Disability Type ............................................... 26 Table 7. Students Living with Their Mother and Father....................................................................... 27 Table 8. Did not eat before the interview............................................................................................... 27 Table 9. Household Possessions ................................................................................................................ 28 Table 10. Caregiver Sample, Summary Statistics.................................................................................... 37 Table 11. Caregiver Education.................................................................................................................... 37 Table 12. Caregiver Relationship to Students......................................................................................... 37 Table 13. Students’ Educational Ambitions and Expectations............................................................. 45 Table 14. Caregivers’ Educational Ambitions and Expectations for Students ................................. 45 Table 15. Determinants of Student Expectations and Aspirations for Their Future ..................... 52 Table 16. Determinants of Caregiver Expectations for Student’s Future ........................................ 53 Table AII.1. Treatment and Comparison Communities in Machinga District.................................. 74 Table AII.2. Treatment and Comparison Communities in Balaka District ....................................... 75 Table AII.3. Evaluation Matrix..................................................................................................................... 76 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | iv TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1. Theory of Change............................................................................................................................8 Figure 2. Ethnic Composition of Student Sample................................................................................... 19 Figure 3. Linguistic Composition of Student Sample ............................................................................. 19 Figure 4. Composition of Students in Their Academic Progression .................................................. 21 Figure 5. Students’ Self-Assessment of Academic Ability ..................................................................... 21 Figure 6. School Attendance ....................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 7. Reasons for Missing School Last Week................................................................................... 23 Figure 8. Travel Time from Home to School (Minutes)....................................................................... 24 Figure 9. Mode of Transportation to School, by Student Sex............................................................. 25 Figure 10. School Commute Partners, by Student Sex......................................................................... 25 Figure 11. Access to Electricity, Cellphones and Reading Material.................................................... 28 Figure 12. Household Asset Index............................................................................................................. 29 Figure 13. Number of Older Siblings Students Have............................................................................. 30 Figure 14. Percentage of Older Siblings Who Are Still Enrolled in Education, by Age ................. 31 Figure 15. Older Siblings’ Highest Level of Completed Education..................................................... 32 Figure 16. Predicted Probability of Sibling Enrollment in Education .................................................. 33 Figure 17. Percentage of Older Siblings Who Are Married, by Age.................................................. 34 Figure 18. Predicted Probability of Marital Status of Older Siblings.................................................. 34 Figure 19. Percentage of Older Siblings Who Have Children, by Age .............................................. 35 Figure 20. Predicted Probability Older Sibling is a Parent.................................................................... 36 Figure 21. Gender Attitudes – Academic Ability and Education Value ............................................. 39 Figure 22. Gender Attitudes – Gender Relations in School ................................................................ 40 Figure 23. Student Responses to Gender Attitude Questions – Gender Roles............................. 41 Figure 24. Student Responses to Gender Attitude Questions – Women’s Rights........................ 41 Figure 25. Gender Equality Index............................................................................................................... 43 Figure 26. Marriage Expectations and Aspirations................................................................................. 47 Figure 27. Expectations and Aspirations for Having Children............................................................. 48 Figure 28. Students’ Aspirations for the Number of Children They Will Have.............................. 48 Figure 29. Distribution of Student’s Quality of Life Current and at Age 25. ................................... 49 Figure 30. Distribution of Expectations for the Student’s Quality of Life in Adulthood, by Student Sex ..................................................................................................................................................... 50 Figure A1. Students with Disabilities.......................................................................................................138 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | v ACRONYMS AMAA Apatseni Mwayi Atsikana Aphunzire CDSS Community Day Secondary Schools DEC Development Experience Clearinghouse DFID Department for International Development DID Difference-in-Difference E3/GenDev Office of Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment EDR Evaluation Design Report EMIS Education Management Information System FGD Focus Group Discussion GRS Grassroot Soccer IKI Invest in Knowledge JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency LGL Let Girls Learn MoEST Malawi’s Ministry of Education, Science and Technology OU Operating Units SCI Save the Children International SOW Scope of Work SRGBV School-Related Gender-Based Violence QED Quasi-Experimental Design USAID U.S. Agency for International Development PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NORC at the University of Chicago, through the USAID Reading and Access Evaluation Contract, serves as the independent evaluator for the external impact evaluation (IE) of the Apatseni Mwayi Atsikana Aphunzire (AMAA) program in Malawi. This is a baseline study, and as such, it seeks to establish the parameters of the investigation and the baseline context. While we describe the methodology that will be used to estimate project impacts and introduce the evaluation research questions, we will not be able to answer questions on program impact until midline. PROJECT BACKGROUND AMAA is a four-year project implemented in five districts across Malawi: Mzimba, Balaka, Machinga, Phalombe, and Chikwawa. The project targets over 60,000 girls in both upper primary and secondary schools. AMAA has four main outcomes: (1) to improve the ability of girls to affect change in self and others; (2) to enhance the creation of an enabling environment for girls’ adolescent development and education achievement; (3) to strengthen the quality of teaching; and (4) improve access to secondary schools. Due to USAID and Malawi’s Ministry of Education (MoEST) priorities, as well as the range of girls’ education activities already existing at the local level, AMAA is delivering district-specific activities in Malawi to mitigate particular barriers to girls’ enrollment and retention in school. In the districts of Balaka and Machinga, the project will construct 11 Community Day Secondary Schools (CDSS) – 5 in Machinga and 6 in Balaka – and provide scholarships to vulnerable boys and girls in each new school. NORC’s evaluation and research of the AMAA program will be limited to the secondary school construction interventions implemented in these two districts and will focus on both girls and boys. Building new Community Day Secondary Schools in Balaka and Machinga districts will certainly lead to an increase in the capacity of the region to educate secondary school students, with immediate effects on girls and their communities. A secondary school closer to home reduces travel time and cost for a girl to attend school, as well as mitigating risks en-route to school. Closer proximity to a secondary school may also have outcomes for the wider community, bringing school faculty closer to students’ families and community members, and rasising expectations for education and employment opportunities. Thus, school construction is expected to increase school attendance and retention, particularly for female students. Improved educational opportunities and outcomes, may also reverberate into other aspects of students’ lives, such as raising students’ and caregivers’ expectations for educational achievement, and delaying expectations for major life milestones, such as marriage and pregnancy, which are especially significant for girls. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 2 EVALUATION PURPOSE AND EVALUATION QUESTIONS The main purpose of the impact evaluation will be to assess the causal impact of the AMAA school construction activity on educational outcomes, and students’ and caregivers’ expectations for students’ futures, with a particular emphasis on how these impacts differ by student gender. The evaluation will answer the following questions: Question 1: What effect does embedding a new CDSS in a community have on (1) primary school completion and transition; and (2) secondary school enrollment, attendance, promotion and retention of girls and boys in the community? Question 2: (2a) What effect does embedding a new CDSS in a community have on the attitudes and expectations of girls, boys, parents and communities in the areas served by the AMAA constructed new schools regarding: ■ Primary school retention and completion and transition to secondary schools; ■ Interest in continuing girls’ and boys’ education and/or vocational training; ■ Marriage and pregnancy; and ■ Future work/employment/career? (2b) What are the attitudes and expectations of (1) girls and boys who have dropped out of school; and (2) girls and boys who are in the new CDSSs regarding: ■ Perceived value of attending school and education as experienced thus-far; ■ Future education; ■ Marriage and pregnancy; and ■ Future work/employment/career? Question 3: What are the reasons for girls and boys to: (1) drop out of school; (2) repeat; and (3) be held back? Question 4: How are the CDSSs helping girls to overcome identified barriers, such as: education costs, early pregnancy, early marriage, lack of WASH facilities, distance to secondary school, and lack of space in secondary schools? Are there additional barriers to accessing schools faced by girls? Question 5: (5a) What effect do the new CDSSs have on the perceptions of learners regarding physical and socio-emotional aspects of safety? (5b) What are the perceptions of girls and boys dropping out of school regarding physical and socio-emotional aspects of safety? Question 6: What experience do new CDSSs have on attracting and retaining teachers? PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 3 Question 7: Are girls, their parents/guardians, and community members satisfied with the building facilities of the new schools? EVALUATION METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW The evaluation and research design includes different methods depending on the question to be addressed. Some questions will be answered using quantitative data only, but other questions will require the use of qualitative information. In some cases, quantitative and qualitative data will complement each other to gain details and understanding. While for some questions it will be possible to identify causal effects using a quasi-experimental approach, other questions are more suitable for descriptive data analyses. The approach and technical details that the evaluation team will use to answer each of the research and evaluation questions is included in Annex II. NORC took advantage of the site selection process for school construction that considered a group of similar communities as candidates for treatment. Treatment was only assigned to a subgroup of those communities, allowing NORC to draw comparison groups from the rest of the list. To measure the impact on the outcomes of interest -such as primary completion rates, transition to and completion of secondary school, reasons for dropping out of school, etc.- NORC will use quantitative and qualitative data collected in each community included in the study. The evaluation approach follows learners that were attending standards 5, 6, 7, and 8 at baseline over time. The primary data sources for the evaluation include (1) Administrative school data on all students in standards 5-8 at baseline, representing a census of these students, tracked annually; (2) A student survey of 20 students per standard per school, for a total of 80 students per school, interviewed at baseline in 2018 and endline in 2021 but also tracked every year to update their enrollment status; and (3) A caregiver/parent survey for caregivers of approximately 40 surveyed students per school. Students in the sample were randomly selected, and chosen to include an equal number of male and female students, wherever possible. A sample of caregivers was also randomly selected. To complement the information, leaders from each community were also interviewed. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS In this report, we present findings from the baseline data collection activity that took place in June-July 2018 in order to establish students’ baseline context, as well as baseline outcome indicators for students’ and caregivers’ aspirations and expectations for students’ futures. We cannot establish baseline values for other outcome indicators, such as dropout or primary school completion rates, because these cannot be known until we follow-up with students during the second round of data collection at midline. The main findings are: ■ The baseline data collection of 23 communities took place during May-June 2018. Data collection was successful and went as planned, with no significant challenges identified. ■ Students are substantially older than what is expected according to the official grade-for￾age schedule in Malawi. The official school age for Standards 5-8 is 10-14 years old, but PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 4 average age in Standard 5 in the sample was approximately 12.9 years old, and 15.9 years old in Standard 8. o Just 24.6% of female students and 17.4% of males are in the grade level corresponding to their age according to the official schedule. ■ Student absenteeism, as reported by the learners, is high. Approximately 28% of students in the sample missed at least one day of school in the week before the interview, and on average, students in the sample missed 0.54 days of school in the preceeding week. Illness, household chores, farmwork, lack of money for school materials, and lack of clean clothes were the most common reasons given by students for their absences. o Rates of absenteeism between female and male students is not statistically different. Of female students, 28.4% missed at least one day of school in the preceeding week, compared to 27.5% of males. ■ On average, students spend about 45 minutes each way commuting between home and school. Approximately 13% of students spend 1.5 hours or more commuting each way. ■ Students come from disadvantaged contexts in terms of family environment, food security, and household assets. Approximately 50.4% of students live with both their mother and father, 38.1% had had something to eat during the day of the interview, and 10% reported having electricity in their homes. ■ Both students and their caregivers express high educational expectations for students. 85.8% of students and 81.2% of caregivers list a university education as their ideal level for the student to achieve, and the vast majority of those with these expectations (82.4% for students and 90% for caregivers) state that they expect the child will actually achieve a university education. These expectations do not vary much by student gender. o These appear to be desires more than expectations formed by experience. Just 1% of caregivers in the sample report having higher than a secondary education (just 26% have completed primary education or higher). Similarly, just 2.5% of students’ older siblings have higher than a secondary education (23.4% of males completed secondary school or higher, compared to just 13.2% of female siblings). ■ Male and female students vary little in their aspirations for when they would like to get married, with a median age of 28 for both sexes, and a mean age of 28.37 for females and a mean of 28.54 for males. The average age caregivers expect male students to marry is 30, compared to 29 for female students, again showing little variation by student sex. o Again, these appear to be desires more than expectations. Based on information students provided about their older siblings, males see approximately a 20% chance of being married by age 20 and a 50% chance of being married by age 25; the likelihood that a woman is married by age 20 is approximately 50%, and there is approximately an 80% chance she is married by 25. ■ Both students and caregivers express their opinions about gender equality. On a scale of 0 to 1, where 0 equates to a weak belief in gender equity and 1 equates to a strong belief in gender equity, the average value for students is 0.563 for females and 0.511 for males. This compares to 0.488 for female caregivers and 0.547 for male caregivers. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 5 o The gender equality index of students and caregivers appear significantly correlated in a statistical sense, though the correlation is small. Students whose caregivers hold more gender equal attitudes are slightly more likely to have more equal attitudes themselves. ■ We observe notable balance between treatment and control groups. The baseline data indicates that the treatment and control groups have very similar respondent characteristics, environmental context, and other measures of interest. Demonstrating similarity across the groups at the start of the study establishes credibility that the untreated group will, indeed, be a viable counterfactual to the treated group at endline. The remarkably good balance between our treatment and control groups indicates that our control group is indeed a very good counterfactural of the treatment group. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 6 INTRODUCTION CONTEXT While the country has seen a growth in primary school enrollment in recent decades, enrollment rates in secondary school remain relatively low1. School fees, long distances to school, a lack of schools and trained teachers, and family responsibilities are all factors that can contribute to a pupil dropping out. Lack of space in the existing facilities limit enrollment as well. Increasing enrollment, particularly for girls, has been a key focus of national policy in recent decades. The USAID-funded Girls’ Attainment in Basic Literacy and Education (GABLE) project (1991-2003), aimed to “increase the long term financial resource base of education, improve the quality, availability and efficiency of primary education, and improve the relevance of primary education for girls” (Kadzamira, 2003). The GABLE project isconsidered an early but successful program promoting education gender parity in a developing country (Kendall, 2006). In addition, in 1994, the central government instituted free primary education for all and has since offered some scholarships for girls to attend secondary school (Kadzamira, 2003). The transition to secondary school is a particularly difficult challenge. According to the Ministry of Education’s 2016 school census, the primary school completion rate and transition rates to secondary school have improved in recent years (2011-2016). During the 2015-16 academic year, 51 percent of students completed primary school and only 33 percent of boys and 36 percent of girls entered secondary schools. While girls attend primary schools and transition to secondary school at slightly higher rates than boys, only 0.9 times as many girls attend secondary school due to higher dropout rates. However, this figure has increased steadily from 0.83 girls per boy since 2011 (Education Management Information System, 2015-2016). In part, transition rates from primary to secondary education are low because there are not enough secondary schools. As primary school completion continues to increase, demand from qualified students for secondary school continues to rise despite limited spots (Chimombo, 2014). In 2016, 193,795 out of 255,583 (75.82%) students passed the Primary School Leaving Certificate Examination (PSLCE) (Nyasa Times, 2017), which determines eligibility for secondary school. However, there are spots only for just over half of these students (McConnell, 2016). Moreover, infrastructure and supplies such as classrooms, textbooks, and toilets remain inadequate. Only 21% of children and 19.8% of girls of secondary school age complete secondary school (EMIS, 2015-2016). Two districts, Machinga and Balaka, are of particular interest for this project. In Machinga, the gross enrollment rate, the portion of enrollees in secondary school out of secondary school￾aged children, was 11.4%, while the net enrollment rate, the portion of appropriately aged enrollees out of secondary school-aged children, was 4.1% in 2011, far lower than the national 1 The Malawi education system involves an 8-4-4 structure: 8 years of primary school, 4 years of secondary school, and 4 years of tertiary school (Kadzamira, 2003). PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 7 average. In Balaka, these figures were 28.0% and 11.4%, respectively, very close to the national average (Integrated Household Survey, 2010-2011). PROJECT BACKGROUND Apatseni Mwayi Atsikana Aphunzire (AMAA) is a USAID-funded project, led by Save the Children (SC), and implemented in collaboration with Concern Worldwide (CW) Grassroot Soccer (GRS). AMAA is supported by USAID’s Let Girls Learn Challenge Fund awarded by the Office of Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment (E3/GenDev). NORC at the University of Chicago, through the USAID Reading and Access Evaluation Contract, is conducting an external and independent evaluation and research study of AMAA secondary school construction. AMAA is a four-year project implemented in five districts across Malawi: Mzimba, Balaka, Machinga, Phalombe, and Chikwawa. The project targets over 60,000 girls in both upper primary and secondary schools. AMAA has four main outcomes: (1) to improve the ability of girls to affect change in self and others; (2) to enhance the creation of an enabling environment for girls’ adolescent development and education achievement; (3) to strengthen the quality of teaching; and (4) improve access to secondary schools. AMAA is part of the global Let Girls Learn (LGL) initiative, launched by the United States Government in March 2015. LGL seeks to ensure adolescent girls around the world are able to access quality education enabling them to reach their full potential. Using the whole-of-girl approach, LGL aims to mitigate the barriers to girls’ retention and survival in school through a package of interventions delivered in the home, at school, in the community, in the system, and with the girl herself. However, due to USAID and Malawi’s Ministry of Education (MoEST) priorities, as well as the range of girls’ education activities already existing at the local level, AMAA is delivering district-specific activities in Malawi to mitigate particular barriers to girls’ enrollment and retention in school. In the districts of Balaka and Machinga, the project will construct 11 Community Day Secondary Schools (CDSS) – 5 in Machinga and 6 in Balaka – and provide scholarships to vulnerable boys and girls in each new school. NORC’s evaluation and research of the AMAA program will be limited to the secondary school construction interventions implemented in these two districts and will focus on both girls and boys. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 8 Figure 1. Theory of Change The evaluation questions and design of this study are informed by the Theory of Change model presented in Figure 1, created by NORC based on conversations with and documents received from Save the Children International and USAID. Figure 1 maps the causal links between AMAA’s construction of new Community Day Secondary Schools and impacts of interest. The model illustrates the processes by which school construction leads to immediate changes in school capacity and proximity, which in turn leads to beneficial outcomes for girls and boys in the surrounding areas. Outputs. Building new Community Day Secondary Schools in Balaka and Machinga districts will certainly lead to an increase in the capacity of the region to educate secondary school students. Additionally, introducing a secondary school into a community where there was not one previously reduces the distance students will need to travel from their homes for the opportunity to access secondary education. It also ensures the school they attend is located within their community and is, therefore, more accessible to their caregivers and other members of their community. Outcomes. We expect these outputs will have immediate effects on girls and their communities (Figure 1, Column 3). A secondary school closer to home reduces travel time and cost for a girl to attend school, which can impact students in several ways. Students who may have needed to board near a school before can now live at home, making secondary education less costly for the family. A shorter commute frees up time for students—that time may be used to study, interact with school staff and other students, participate in extracurricular activities, or help the family at home. Furthermore, a shorter commute to school reduces the risks of physical and emotional violence students, particularly girls, encounter en route to school. INPUTS 11 Community Day Secondary Schools constructed in Balaka and Machinga districts OUTCOMES Decrease the physical and emotional safety hazards related to traveling to school Increase time for students to attend class, complete homework, interact with teachers, and participate in extracurricular activities Increase interaction of teachers with parents and community members Increase student, parent, and community interest in and expectation of girls (and boys) to continue their education IMPACT Increase secondary school enrollment, attendance, promotion, and retention for girls and boys Increase primary school retention and completion OUTPUTS Increase the number of students who can attend secondary school Decrease the distance and travel time for students to attend secondary school Schools embedded in the communities they serve PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 9 Closer proximity to a secondary school may also have outcomes for the wider community. Reducing the distance between school and home brings teachers and school staff closer to the families and communities of their students. Secondly, a new school can place education in the forefront of community members’ minds—raising interest and expectations for the future of their children’s education and employment opportunities. Impacts. Having identified likely immediate changes to the realities of students seeking secondary education, we can envision the final impacts (Figure 1, Column 4). First, we expect to see more students attending secondary school. More students can afford to attend a day school versus a boarding school, and acceptance rates into secondary schools should increase as school capacity grows. Second, a reduction in costs, safety risks, and travel time to school can translate into better attendance and retention rates. Third, changes in the frequency of interactions between the school and the community could strengthen the web of support needed for a student to succeed in school. Given these impacts at the secondary school level, we can surmise there will also be impacts on younger students. If previously primary students failed to finish school because they did not see potential for them to attend secondary school, their motivation to complete primary school may improve and primary school retention and completion rates may also rise. We would be remiss to not mention that improved educational outcomes can reverberate into many other aspects of students’, especially girls’, lives. Continuing education can delay marriage, delay pregnancy, and improve employment opportunities for a girl, and ultimately improve the lives of her children, including their own educational achievement. However, these long-term impacts are beyond the scope and time period of this study. Evidence. The existing literature on secondary school construction is quite sparse. A study of a primary school construction program in Indonesia found that each primary school built per 1,000 children led to a modest average increase of 0.12 to 0.19 years of education and 1.5 to 2.7% in wages (Duflo, 2001). Another study of the same program ascertained significant but mixed macroeconomic effects. The program was estimated to generate a 10% greater proportion of primary school graduates in the work force and a 6.6-7.5% increase in labor force participation. However, it also produced a 4-7% decline in wages (Duflo, 2004). Another research study found a statistically significant but modest relationship between distance to school and enrollment in 13 of 21 countries measured for primary school and 7 for secondary school. However, there was large variability among different countries, suggesting the importance of context in how much distance to school impacts enrollment. Cameroon, Chad, and Benin, which are all Western and Central African countries with particularly low school enrollment, showed the highest correlation. (Filmer, 2007). Other studies showed varying results in whether distance is significantly correlated with enrollment (Handa, 2001; Burke, 2004; Lavy, 1996; Younger, 2000). For example, Handa finds that building more schools in rural Mozambique is correlated with higher primary school enrollment. On the other hand, Younger finds that travel time to school is not a statistically significant predictor of primary school enrollment status in rural Peru but the available data is insufficient to test this for secondary school enrollment. He finds that measures of local school quality are better predictors of secondary enrollment than costs to attend. However, it is important to note that PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 10 these papers only measured the correlation between distance and enrollment and do not determine the effects of school construction or account for external factors that could impact this correlation. A randomized control trial in Afghanistan on the implementation of “girl-friendly” primary schools, which controls for all other factors, found significant effects from primary school construction. Placing a school in a village led to a 52% enrollment increase for girls from the baseline level of 18%, and a 35% enrollment increase for boys from the baseline level of 35%, eliminating the gender gap in enrollment (Burde, 2013). Another “girl-friendly” primary school construction program in Burkina Faso augmented enrollment rates by 18.5 percentage points and a 4.7 greater percentage point increase for girls, while also improving test scores by 2.2 standard deviations. (Kazianga, 2013). These last two studies indicate that making schools more amenable to girls increases enrollment, particularly because the Burkina Faso study found that a large portion of the schools’ effects were due to their “girl-friendly” characteristics. However, having a school closer to home does not automatically warrant access and enrollment. More schools are necessary to increase enrollment but they might not be sufficient. Other barriers, such as school fees, and early marriage for example (Baird et al (2011), Omoeva et al. (2014) among many) are important as well. Keeping girls in school in the developing world has been an area of particular interest, and many different initiatives have taken place in the past in the past and continue today. These include conditional and unconditional cash transfers (Baird et al (2011) for Malawi), programs that focus on addressing girls’ health, such as a study that analyzed the impact of deworming on school attendance (Miguel and Kremer, 2004), and on mitigating child marriage, a significant cause of girls dropping out (Wodon et al., 2017). Other approaches have engaged traditional authorities and societal institutions to change cultural norms surrounding female education (Keleher, 2008). In sum, little empirical work has been done anywhere in the world on school construction, particularly for the case of secondary schools, and the studies that have been published demonstrate significant variability. While some evidence suggests the construction of schools may increase enrollment, particularly for girls, it is clear that effects will be highly dependent on context, and that additional evidence is needed, which helps to motivate the present study. This evaluation will constitute an important opportunity to increase the evidence in general, and to advance our understanding of the Malawian case in particular. EVALUATION PURPOSE AND AUDIENCE This is a baseline study, and as such, it seeks to establish the parameters of the investigation and the baseline context. We will not be able to answer questions on program impact until midline. Similarly, it is important to note that our data collection methods mean that we cannot establish the baseline values of many outcome indicators in this report. Our primary data come from following students across time; we cannot make observations about indicators such as drop out rates, for example, until we have at least two rounds of data that allow us to observe which students dropped out over the time period, and which continued their studies. Rather, our purpose here is to establish the general context of the students in our sample, along with obtaining baseline values for indicators such as gender attitudes and educational aspirations, which can be measured with a single round of data. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 11 A secondary purpose of the baseline study is to conduct balance check exercises to verify that respondent characteristics, environmental context, and other measures of interest in the study sample are similar across treatment and control groups at baseline. Demonstrating similarity across the groups at the start of the study establishes credibility that the untreated group will indeed be a viable counterfactual to the treated group at endline. These checks showed notable balance between treatment and control group, and therefore findings will be shown for the tow groups together. Readers wishing for details are referred to Annex V. The findings, conclusions, and recommendations of this study can be applied to future secondary schools construction in Malawi and other places of similar characteristics. The findings of this evaluation will contribute to the growing body of evidence on the relationship between school construction and enrollment, informing new school construction programming for adolescent girls in the future. The audiences for this evaluation and research study comprise USAID Operating Units (OU), notably, USAID/Malawi, the Africa Bureau, E3/GenDev, the E3/Education Office; and the E3/Energy and Infrastructure Office. Other important audiences are the Government of Malawi, primarily, Malawi’s Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MoEST), and donors committed to building and/or supporting schools, such as Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Department for International Development (DFID), the World Bank, and the World Food Program. Implementer Save the Children and its partners are also important audiences for the study. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 12 EVALUATION QUESTIONS AND METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW In April 2017, representatives from USAID (US and the Malawi Mission), Save the Children AMAA team, and NORC met in Lilongwe to start planning the evaluation of AMAA secondary school construction. US/Malawi explained their objectives regarding the evaluation and research study and the importance of using results in the interactions with the MoEST. During January and February 2018, the AMAA team, USAID/Malawi, USAID Africa Bureau, E3/GenDev, the E3/Education Office, and the E3/Energy and Infrastructure Office held conversations about the objectives of the study and possible research questions. The NORC evaluation team participated in some of those discussions. Based on those conversations, USAID E3/GenDev proposed the list of evaluation and research questions below. While we will not be able to begin answering these questions until the midline report, when school construction will have completed and we have multiple rounds of data, we include them here to establish the study’s goals. EVALUATION QUESTIONS Question 1: What effect does embedding a new CDSS in a community have on (1) primary school completion and transition; and (2) secondary school enrollment, attendance, promotion and retention of girls and boys in the community? Question 2: (2a) What effect does embedding a new CDSS in a community have on the attitudes and expectations of girls, boys, parents and communities in the areas served by the AMAA constructed new schools regarding: ■ Primary school retention and completion and transition to secondary schools; ■ Interest in continuing girls’ and boys’ education and/or vocational training; ■ Marriage and pregnancy; and ■ Future work/employment/career? (2b) What are the attitudes and expectations of (1) girls and boys who have dropped out of school; and (2) girls and boys who are in the new CDSSs regarding: ■ Perceived value of attending school and education as experienced thus-far; ■ Future education; ■ Marriage and pregnancy; and ■ Future work/employment/career? PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 13 Question 3: What are the reasons for girls and boys to: (1) drop out of school; (2) repeat; and (3) be held back? Question 4: How are the CDSSs helping girls to overcome identified barriers, such as: education costs, early pregnancy, early marriage, lack of WASH facilities, distance to secondary school, and lack of space in secondary schools? Are there additional barriers to accessing schools faced by girls? Question 5: (5a) What effect do the new CDSSs have on the perceptions of learners regarding physical and socio-emotional aspects of safety? (5b) What are the perceptions of girls and boys dropping out of school regarding physical and socio-emotional aspects of safety? Question 6: What experience do new CDSSs have on attracting and retaining teachers? Question 7: Are girls, their parents/guardians, and community members satisfied with the building facilities of the new schools? METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW The evaluation and research design includes different methods depending on the question to be addressed. Some questions will be answered using quantitative data only, but other questions will require the use of qualitative information. In some cases, quantitative and qualitative data will complement each other to gain details and understanding. While for some questions it will be possible to identify causal effects using a quasi-experimental approach, other questions are more suitable for descriptive data analyses. The approach and technical details that the evaluation team will use to answer each of the research and evaluation questions is included in Annex II. The methods require quantitative and qualitative data gathered from learners, parents, secondary teachers and leaders in communities where the secondary schools are being built (Treatment) and in communities without secondary schools but are similar otherwise (Comparison). We have described below details about community selection, samples, and baseline data collection. COMMUNITY SELECTION NORC took advantage of the site selection process that considered a group of similar communities as candidates for treatment. Treatment was only assigned to a subgroup of communities, allowing NORC to draw comparison groups from the rest of the list. The selection process for treatment communities is detailed below, followed by NORC’s process for selecting comparison communities. A committee made up of USAID/Malawi, Save the Children, and MoEST officials, supported by technical teams, selected the Treatment communities to receive the AMAA secondary schools. USAID/Malawi selected the initial pool of candidate communities using the following criteria: PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 14 primary school pass rate, Standard 8 enrollment, located at least 10km from another Community Day Secondary School (CDSS). The committee then selected communities from this list based on their own preferences. Each selected community was then assessed on technical suitability with respect to the following criteria: large enough to cater to the size of the structures to be constructed; land voluntarily donated by the community and land user, not owned by the church; soil and land slope suitable for construction; nearby water source; and environmental impact of construction. Some selected communities were rejected on technical grounds2 and had to be replaced by others included in the original list of candidates. This occurred several times, giving the selection into treatment process a high degree of (unintended) randomness and allowing the evaluation team to use the initial list as a source for selecting comparison communities. We include more details about the community selection process in Annex II. DATA To measure the impact on the outcomes of interest -such as primary completion rates, transition to and completion of secondary school, reasons for dropping out of school, etc.- NORC will use quantitative and qualitative data collected in each community included in the study. The evaluation approach follows learners that were attending standards 5, 6, 7, and 8 at baseline over time. The primary data sources for the evaluation include (1) Administrative school data on students in standards 5-8 at baseline, representing a census of these students in the exisiting primary schools, tracked annually; (2) A student survey of 20 students per standard per school, for a total of 80 students per school, interviewed at baseline in 2018 and endline in 2021 but also tracked every year to update their enrollment status; and (3) A caregiver/parent survey for caregivers of approximately 40 surveyed students per school. Students in the sample were randomly selected, and chosen to include an equal number of male and female students, wherever possible. The subsample of caregivers was also randomly selected. At midline and endline, we will complement these data with interviews of community leaders, interviews in each case of a learner dropping out of school, focus group discussions (FGDs) with learners and caregivers, and administrative data on and interviews with all secondary teachers in the new schools. SAMPLE SIZE The sample size was determined by the number of secondary schools being constructed, 11. A mathematical calculation was used to estimate the smallest effect that could be detected with a sample of 11 treatment communities and an equal number of control communities, with 80 learners in each existing primary school, for a total sample of 1,760 learners. (see sample calculation details in Annex II). In other words, assuming that the construction of schools generates real impacts, we ask what the smallest impact would be that we can detect with a 2 The technical issues that affected selection of communities to receive treatment are not likely to have incidence on or be associated with school enrollment or other outcomes of interest in this study and, therefore, do no create bias problems. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 15 reasonable level of confidence given this sample size. With this sample, we would be able to detect a change in transition rates from primary to secondary school from 30% to 50% or higher when we do the analysis for each standard separately, and from 30% to 47% or higher when we analyse standards 6 to 8 altogether. In addition, we will be able to detect changes from 50% to 70% or higher in primary school completion rates when analyzing standards separately, and from 50% to 65% or higher when analyzing all standards together. While school construction could generate impacts that are smaller than this, we cannot be reasonably confident that these smaller effects would show up as statistically significant findings in our estimations. Table 1. Planned and Observed Student Sample Treatment Communities Control Communities Planned Sample Observed Sample Planned Sample Observed Sample Schools 11 11 11 12 Standard 5 Learners 220 222 220 242 Male 110 112 110 115 Female 110 110 110 127 Standard 6 Learners 220 220 220 239 Male 110 105 110 119 Female 110 115 110 120 Standard 7 Learners 220 220 220 235 Male 110 109 110 117 Female 110 111 110 118 Standard 8 Learners 220 208 220 237 Male 110 109 110 112 Female 110 99 110 125 Total Learners 880 870 880 953 Male 440 435 440 463 Female 440 435 440 490 As Table 1 shows, our baseline sample is slightly larger than the planned sample. In particular, schools in control communities consistently met or exceeded the planned sample, aided by the fact that one additional control school was sampled3 . Schools in treatment communities generally met the planned sample, though in some cases fell just slightly below or above4. Further details on the sample and sampling strategy are found in Annex II. 3 Initially the community was selected for treatment, however the construction site was not suitable for construction and the community was rejected and replaced by another one. Since data from this community had already been collected we decided to keep it and include it as part of the control group. 4 Samples could be slightly below the planned target when fewer than 20 students were found in the class. Samples could be slightly above the planned target when the class had just one or two students over 20. In those cases, the decision was to include them all to avoid excluding one or two students. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 16 We show in Table 2 the number of caregivers in our sample. We invited 40 caregivers per community, 10 for each standard. We estimated that out of 40 caregivers invited in each school for the interview, only 25 to 35 of them would be found and willing participate. However, our observed sample surpassed our expectacions and reached a number close to the maximum in treatment communities and even higher in the control group where we have 12 communities rather than the 11 originally planned. Table 2. Planned and Observed Caregiver Sample Treatment Communities Control Communities Maximum 1 Planned Sample Observed Sample Maximum 1 Planned Sample Observed Sample Schools 11 11 11 12 Standard 5 Caregiver 110 104 110 116 Male Child 55 49 55 56 Female Child 55 55 55 60 Standard 6 Caregiver 110 103 110 114 Male Child 55 53 55 58 Female Child 55 50 55 56 Standard 7 Caregiver 110 106 110 115 Male 55 54 55 58 Female Child 55 52 55 57 Standard 8 Caregiver 110 103 110 114 Male Child 55 54 55 56 Female Child 55 49 55 58 Total Caregivers 440 416 440 459 Male Child 220 210 220 228 Female Child 220 206 220 231 Note 1: We invited 40 caregivers in each school but estimated that out of 40 only 25 to 35 of them would be found and willing participate. Maximum planned sample is calculated based on 40 caregivers per school. Finally, the leader –the village headman or headwoman- from each of the 23 communities was successfully interviewed at baseline. BASELINE DATA COLLECTION The baseline data collection of 22 communities took place during May-June 2018, and one community was visited in July5 . 5 This was the last community to be selected for treatment and replaced a community that was not approved for construction because of technical concerns PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 17 For all data collection activities, NORC worked closely with its local partner, Invest in Knowledge Inc, a research and data collection firm based in Malawi. We obtained approval for this study and all associated data collection from both the NORC IRB and the National Committee on Research in the Social Sciences and Humanities, in Malawi. NORC and IKI worked in close collaboration with the District Education Officers to obtain all permissions and support for the data collection necessary for the evaluation. The NORC evaluation team provided ethics training to all team members from the local data collection firm and all team members committed to comply with child protection policies. There were no significant challenges identified during baseline data collection. Baseline Instruments All survey instruments used in the baseline data collection are included in Annex III. Using the student tool, we collected demographic information about the learner; travel time to/from school; household socio-economic characteristics including parental/caregiver education, access to electricity and household possesions; information about learners’ older siblings; attitudes towards gender norms; learners’ educational aspirations and expectations, and information regarding their expectations and desires about marriage, children, and work. Similarly, we asked caregivers about their own attitudes regarding gender equity and aspirations and expectations for their child. Community leaders responded to similar questions during an interview that inquired about their gender attidudes, and the future of children in their community regarding education, marriage and children, and work. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 18 FINDINGS This describes the data collected from students and caregivers at baseline. Our purpose is to establish that data collection targets have been met, describe the student context, and provide baseline measures for some outcome indicators, such as gender attitudes and educational aspirations, which can be measured with a single round of survey data. Note that baseline values for other outcomes, such as dropout rates, cannot be established with a single round of data, since we cannot know whether a student drops out until they have been observed in multiple time periods. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR STUDENT SAMPLE Table 3 presents summary statistics for the student sample. A total of 1,823 students were interviewed from 23 primary schools across two districts, Balaka and Machinga. As the table shows, 51% of the students are girls. As intended by design, students are distributed evenly across Standards 5-8, with approximately 25% of the sample in each of the four grade levels. Only 6% of the students in our sample report receiving some type of scholarship. Table 3. Student Sample, Summary Statistics Variable Percentage Student attends Standard 5 25 Student attends Standard 6 25 Student attends Standard 7 25 Student attends Standard 8 24 Female 51 Has scholarship 6 We asked learners with which ethnic group/s or community/ies they identify themselves. Figure 2 shows the ethnic composition of the students in the sample. As shown, Chewa, Yao, and Lomwe are the largest ethnic groups, with 33.3%, 28.5%, and 24.4% of students identifying as members of each group, respectively. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 19 Figure 2. Ethnic Composition of Student Sample 0 10 20 30 % of Students Note: Categories are not mutually exclusive. A student may identify with more than one ethnic group. Chewa Lomwe Yao Ngoni Nyanja Sena Other Examining the compostion of the students in the sample in terms of the primary language spoken at home, Chichewa is clearly the dominant language, constituting the main language spoken at home for 79.2% of students. Chiyao is the primary language of 13.1% of students, while Chilomwe and Chinyanja each account for approximately 3.1% of students, and other languages account for just 1.4% of students. We show the distribution of main language spoken at home in Figure 3. Figure 3. Linguistic Composition of Student Sample 0 20 40 60 80 % of Students Chichewa Chilomwe Chinyanja Chiyao Other PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 20 Academic Achievement For standards 5-8, the official age range for students is 10-14; with a mean age of 14.35 years the students in our sample are older than the official age track would predict. Table 4 shows the average age of students in each standard by sex. If learners start school on time and advance one year per additional year of age, they should be 10 or 11 years old in standard 5, 11 or 12 years old in Standard 6, 12 or 13 years in standard 7, and 13 or 14 in standard 8. Table 4 shows that, on average, students are older than expected for their standard and this is more common among males than females. Table 4. Student Age, by Standard and Sex Male Student Female Student Standard 5 13.0 12.8 Standard 6 14.0 13.5 Standard 7 15.4 14.4 Standard 8 16.3 15.5 Figure 4 shows that most students are older than the appropriate age for their standard. Just 24.6% of female students and 17.4% of male students are on-track given their age. More than 50% of females and 40% of males are behind one year in their studies, and 26% and 40% respectively are 2 or more years behind. This is likely due to a combination of delayed enrollment and grade repetition, and perhaps out of school periods. Girls are significantly more likely to be on-track than boys. This could be explained, in part, by the fact that around 20% of the students in our sample are currently repeating the same grade level they attended in the previous academic year. On the other hand, these higher than expected ages may also reflect the fact that not all children start standard 1 on time, at age 6. According to the Malawi Education Management Information System (EMIS) 2015/16 report, 35% of the learners were overaged ranging from 7 years to 12 years when they first enrolled in primary school. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 21 Figure 4. Composition of Students in Their Academic Progression 0 10 20 30 40 50 % of Students Female Male Note: On-track is defined as age 11 or younger in Standard 5, age 12 or younger in Standard 6, 13 or younger in Standard 7, and 14 or younger in Standard 8. On-track 1 year behind Behind > 1 year Though Figure 4 shows the majority of learners are not in the correct standard for their age, most of them appear confident in their academic abilities. We asked learners to rate themselves as students. The possible categories were excellent, very good, good, and not-so-good, and we show the results in Figure 5. Among female students, 56.1% rate themselves as either “very good” or “excellent” students, compared to 59% of males. Overall, there is little difference between boys and girls in terms of how students rate themselves although boys tend to be slightly more confident. Less than 10% of the learners define themselves as not-so-good in terms of academic performance. Figure 5. Students’ Self-Assessment of Academic Ability 0 10 20 30 40 % of Students Female Male Academically, what type of student are you? Not so good Good Very good Excellent PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 22 Absenteeism Table 5 provides insight into students’ attendance patterns. Approximately 28% of the sample missed at least one day of school in the week before the interview, and on average, students in the sample missed 0.54 days of school. Table 5. Student School Attendance Student missed at least 1 day of school last week 28% Average days absent last week 0.54 days Disaggretating by gender, 71.6% of female students attended school every day in the previous week, compared to 72.5% of male students. Indeed, Figure 6 shows that male and female students report nearly identical distributions in abseentism with similar percentages missing 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 days of school. Figure 6. School Attendance 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 20 40 60 80 % of Students Female Male How many days did you miss school last week? As Figure 7 shows, among the students who missed at least one school day in the previous week, the most common reason for the absence was sickness (64.8%). Other reasons for missing school include having to do household chores or take care of a family member (10.4%), having outstanding tuition (costs associated with attending) or not having enough money to buy school materials (6.9%), and not having clean clothes for school (5.1%). Some gender differences can be observed, with female students being slightly more likely to report being sick (69%, compared to 60.2% for males), and males slightly more likely to report having to work (4.1%, compared to 0.4% for females) and having no clean clothes for school (8.1%, compared to 2.3% for females). PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 23 Figure 7. Reasons for Missing School Last Week 0 20 40 60 80 % of Students Female Male Note: Question only asked to the 508 students who missed at least one day of school in the previous week. Work/Farmwork Housework/Care for Family Member Sick No Money for Tuition/Materials Dirty Clothes Other Distance to school and mode of transportation Students appear to have to cover long distances from home to school and back. On average, students spend about 45 minutes each way commuting between home and school. While 15.1% of the sample spends less than 15 minutes to reach the school, 5.8% of students spend two hours or more to get between home and school. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 24 Figure 8. Travel Time from Home to School (Minutes) <15 15-29 30-44 45-59 60-89 90-119 120+ 0 5 10 15 20 25 % of Students Nearly all students (98.6%) go to school on foot, while just 2% commute by bicycle, and just 0.2% commute by other means of transportation, such as by motorbike.6 Figure 9 shows the split by student sex, with only very small differences observed between males and females. A greater proportion of male students (3.2%) than female students (0.9%) uses bikes to commute to school. This accounts for the small gender difference seen in students who walk to school, with 99.4% of female students walking, compared to 97.8% of males. 6 Note that the percentages do not add up to 100% because options are not mutually exclusive. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 25 Figure 9. Mode of Transportation to School, by Student Sex 0 20 40 60 80 100 % of Students Female Male Note: Options are not mutually exclusive. Generally, how do you travel to school? Walking Bicycle Other We asked the students if they go from home to school alone or with others. The responses were similar for male and female students. We show in Figure 10 that approximately 23.8% of female students and 27.4% of male students commute alone, 29.7% of females and 28.4% of males commute with older children, and 55.4% of females and 54% of males commute with children their own age or younger. Just 1.8% of female students and 1.3% of male students travels to school with an adult. Figure 10. School Commute Partners, by Student Sex 0 20 40 60 % of Students Female Male Note: Options are not mutually exclusive. Who do you generally travel to school with? Alone An Adult Older Children Children Your Age or Younger PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 26 Disabilities The survey also asked students about disabilities in six areas, prompting them about their level of difficulty seeing, hearing, walking, thinking (memory and concentration), taking care of themselves (washing and dressing), and communicating, due to health problems. Response options include no difficulty, some difficulty, a lot of difficulty and cannot do it at all. Table 6 shows the percentage of students that reported having some or higher levels of difficulty for each disability. Table 6. Percentage of Students with Disabilities, by Disability Type Do you have difficulty...? Percent with at least some difficulty Seeing 8.7% Hearing 7.6% Getting around (e.g. walking or climbing steps) 4.9% Thinking (e.g. remembering or concentrating) 31.3% Taking care of yourself (e.g. washing or dressing) 0.7% Communicating (e.g. understanding or being understood when you speak) 12.3% These questions7 do not seem to capture some disabilities properly, although careful efforts were made in translations and testing. Students tend to report problems remembering and concentrating in very large numbers suggesting perhaps certain confusion between health problems and normal challenges in keeping concentration and memory8. Reported difficulties in communicating also seem high; however, it is difficult to be conclusive due to the lack of general information regarding disabilities. From the responses, we also calculated four separate disability definitions using guidelines from the Washington Group on Disability Statistics9, which we included in Annex IV. Home Environment The learner questionnaire included questions about the learners’ home environment. We asked students whether they live with their parents. A large number of students come from single parent homes. Just over half of the learners live with their father. Table 7 shows the details. Around 50% of students live with both their mother and father, almost 30% live with their mother but not their father, and almost 18% live with neither their mother nor their father. 7 We followed the guidelines in “How-To Note, Collecting Data on Disability in Education Programming”, USAID Education Office, February 2018. 8 NORC identified similar problems using this approach to disability data collection among primary school learners in South Africa. 9 Washington Group on Disability Statistics. 2017. “Analytic Guidelines: Creating Disability Identifiers Using the Washington Group Short Set (WG-SS) SPSS Syntax”, 23 October. From: http://www.washingtongroup-disability.com/wp￾content/uploads/2016/12/WG-Document-5-Analytic-Guidelines-for-the-Washington-Group-Short-Set.pdf PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 27 Table 7. Students Living with Their Mother and Father Do you live with your father? Do you live with your mother? No Yes Total No 17.71% 2.14% 19.86% Yes 29.79% 50.36% 80.14% Total 47.5% 52.5% 100% We also asked students whether they had something to eat that day before we met them for the interview. In Table 8, we show that most students, approximately 62% of them, responded negatively further highlighting the difficult economic circumstances these children face. Table 8. Did not eat before the interview Did you eat anything today? Obs. Percentage No 1,128 61.9 Yes 695 38.1 Total 1,823 Figure 11 shows the percentage of students whose households have access to electricity, at least one working cellphone, and any books besides schoolbooks that students can read. The difficult contexts these students come from can be observed most vividly in the low levels of electricity connections, with only 10% of students in the sample having electricity in their household. Access to cellphones is more common, with 67% of the learners living in a household where there is at least one mobile phone. Finally, only 28% of students have books in their home. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 28 Figure 11. Access to Electricity, Cellphones and Reading Material 0 20 40 60 % of Students Does your household have... Electricity A Cellphone Books (excludes schoolbooks) We also asked students about household assets ownership, namely whether their household has, in good working condition, a chair, a bed, a clock, a radio, a stove, a television, a computer, a refrigerator, a bicycle, a motorcycle, and a car/truck/boat. In Table 9, we show the percentages of learners that report having each those items. Learners have very few possessions in their homes. Basic items like chairs, beds, radio or bycicles are the most common but far from being present in many homes. In the last row of the table, we show that on average they have less than 2 out of the 11 items we asked about. Table 9. Household Possessions Does you household have a…? Chair 36.1% Bed 25.8% Clock 8.8% Radio 38.5% Stove 10.7% Television 5.3% Computer 1.0% Refrigerator 1.8% Motorcycle 4.6% Bicycle 55.7% Car/Truck/Motor boat 0.6% Average count of household possessions (max=11) 1.9 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 29 We construced a simple asset index ranging from zero to 11, depending on the number of items that each household has according to the learner. We show the distribution of the index in Figure 12. Almost a quarter of the learners report havening none of these items at home. Less than 20% of the learners have more than 3 items, and less than 4% have more than 5. Figure 12. Household Asset Index 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 5 10 15 20 25 % of Students 0=Poorest, 11=Richest Asset Index Students’ Older Siblings We asked students several questions about their older siblings, which among others things, brings further insight into the students’ context and the expectations they might have for their own future. Figure 13 shows the number of older siblings students in the sample have. Approximately 28% do not have any older siblings, 22% have one older sibling, 19 % have two, and around 31% have three or more. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 30 Figure 13. Number of Older Siblings Students Have 0 1 2 3 4 5 6+ 0 10 20 30 % of Students Students with at least one older sibling were asked additional questions about their three oldest siblings. These questions asked for the sex and age of the siblings, as well as their education, marital status, and whether they have any children. Figure 14 shows the percentage of older siblings enrolled in education at the time of the student interview, disaggregated by the age of the sibling. Nearly all siblings aged 12-14 are enrolled in school, though this figure begins to drop sharply with each additional year of age starting around age 16. It appears that few can expect to continue their studies past age 19; given that the average student in our sample of Standards 5 to 8, is over 14 years of age and repeating grade levels appears common, it seems likely that a high percentage of older siblings leave education before finishing secondary school. Figure 15 corroborates this hypothesis. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 31 Figure 14. Percentage of Older Siblings Who Are Still Enrolled in Education, by Age 0 20 40 60 80 100 % of Siblings Who Are Students 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Sibling Age Note: Definition of 'student' includes any level - primary, secondary, vocation, university, etc. Is your sibling a student? Figure 15 shows the highest level of education completed by those older siblings who are no longer in school, disaggregated by sex. Overall, just over 15% of those older siblings finished Form 4, the equivalent of graduating from secondary school, before leaving education. Notably, the percentage of male siblings completing secondary school is nearly twice as high as the percentage of female siblings, with 23.4% males completing Form 4 or higher, compared to 13.2% of females. Given that we are focusing on those not in school anymore, it is possible these numbers are slightly undestimating rate of completion of secondary school; regardless, the percentages are very low, particularly for females. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 32 Figure 15. Older Siblings’ Highest Level of Completed Education 0 10 20 30 % of Siblings Sister Brother < Stnd. 5 Between Stnd. 5-7 Finish Stnd. 8 Between Form 1-3 Finish Form 4 Vocatnl. School University < Stnd. 5 Between Stnd. 5-7 Finish Stnd. 8 Between Form 1-3 Finish Form 4 Vocatnl. School University Note: Question only asked of the 1,962 siblings not currently enrolled in school. What is the highest level of education he/she completed? Next, we analyze whether the proportion of older siblings currently enrolled in education at each age differs by sibling sex. We estimated the probabilities that a sibling is enrolled in school, based on their age and sex10. To the extent students look to their older siblings to form expectations for their own lives, this exercise provides us with a picture of when students might expect to leave education. In addition, it further informs us of the current education and sex situation in the communities in our sample. Figure 16 plots these estimated probabilities, demonstrating that male and female enrollment in education diverges significantly starting around age 16. By age 18, males are over 11 percentage points more likely to be enrolled in education than females, with a predicted probability of 59.3% for males and 47.7% for females; by age 20, the gap between the male and female probability of enrollment is approximately 14.5 percentage points. These findings are consistent with results presented in Figure 15 above that indicate that among those that are not attending school anymore, a relatively low percentage has finished secondary 10 To do this we run probit model with age and sex as independent variables. We also include a term that multiplies sibling age by the dummy for sex, such that the term is equal to the sibling’s age for male siblings, and equal to zero for female siblings; this term allows the impact of age on enrollment status to vary between males and females: Pr(SiblingStudenti,s=1) = f(SiblingMalei,s , SiblingAgei,s, SiblingMalei,s*SiblingAgei,s) Where Pr(SiblingStudenti,s=1) is the probability that sibling i, related to student s, is currently enrolled as a student in any education program. SiblingMalei,s is a dummy variable indicating that the sibling is male, and SiblingAgei,s is the sibling’s age in years. The term SiblingMalei,s*SiblingAgei,s, is as described above. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 33 school, and the percentage of those who have finished secondary school or gone on to higher education is significantly higher for male siblings than for female siblings. Figure 16. Predicted Probability of Sibling Enrollment in Education 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1 Probability Sibling is Studying 10 15 20 25 30 35 Sibling Age (Years) Male Siblings Female Siblings Note: Graph uses predicted values from a probit model with sibling education enrollement status as the dependent variable, and sibling sex, age, and a sex-age interaction as independent variables. Probability Older Sibling is Still Studying Based on Sibling Age and Sex A likely explanation of why females stop their studies earlier than males and achieve a lower level of education is that they marry and have children earlier. Figure 17 shows the percentage of older siblings who are married, by age. First, we note that some of the students’ older siblings, are married before 18 years of age11, for example among those that are 17, 10.3% are married. Second, between the ages of 17 to 20 years appears to be the time when most of the older siblings get married. Of course, this corresponds to the age range where many are also leaving education. Most of those who will get married appear to marry by age 25, with marriage rates increasing only very little between the ages of 25 and 30. We estimated the probabilities of being married base on age and sex in the same way we calculated probabilities of school enrollment above. We plot these probabilities in Figure 18. The difference between males and females is stark; between the ages of 15-25, a key period for finishing secondary school and continuing to vocational school or university, females appear approximately 20-30 percentage points more likely to be married than males. At age 18, for example, when a sibling whose educational career has followed the standard progression would 11 As February 14, 2017 the Malawi Parliament adopted a constitutional amendment that raised the minimum age of marriage to 18 years for both males and females. Before, marriage from 15 to 18 was legal with parental consent (http://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2017/2/news-malawi-parliament-adopts-amendment-to-end-child-marriage). PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 34 be on-track to graduate secondary school, a female’s predicted probability of being married is 39%, compared to 13% for a male. Figure 17. Percentage of Older Siblings Who Are Married, by Age 0 20 40 60 80 % of Siblings Who Are Married 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Sibling Age Is your sibling married? Figure 18. Predicted Probability of Marital Status of Older Siblings 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1 Probability Sibling is Married 10 15 20 25 30 35 Sibling Age (Years) Male Siblings Female Siblings Note: Graph uses predicted values from a probit model with marital status as the dependent variable, and sibling sex, age, and a sex-age interaction as independent variables. Probability Older Sibling is Married Based on Sibling Age and Sex PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 35 Looking at older siblings with children of their own tells a similar story. It appears that many siblings had their first child between the ages of 17 and 20, and that most have a child by age 22. Figure 19 shows a strong upward trend in the percentage of siblings with children seen through age 25. Of siblings between the ages of 25 and 30, 83.4% have at least one child. Figure 19. Percentage of Older Siblings Who Have Children, by Age 0 20 40 60 80 100 % of Siblings Who Have Children 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Sibling Age Does your sibling have children? We estimated the probabilities of having at least one child, by age for males and for females, using the same approach we employed before. We plot the probability that the sibling has at least one child by the sibling’s age and sex in Figure 20. Again, there is a sharp contrast between males and females; at age 18, the predicted probability that a female has a child is almost 35%, compared to 8.5% for males. By age 20, the gap between males and females is nearly 40 percentage points, with a predicted probability of 54.3% for females and 16.7% for males. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 36 Figure 20. Predicted Probability Older Sibling is a Parent 0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1 Probability Sibling Has Children 10 15 20 25 30 35 Sibling Age (Years) Male Siblings Female Siblings Note: Graph uses predicted values from a probit model with sibling parent status as the dependent variable, and sibling sex, age, and a sex-age interaction as independent variables. Probability Older Sibling Has Children Based on Sibling Age and Sex DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR CAREGIVER SAMPLE Approximately half of the sampled students in each school were selected to have one of their caregivers12 participate in an interview. Since the student sample included approximately 80 students in each of the 23 schools, this meant that approximately 40 caregivers were interviewed in each school, for a final sample of 875 caregivers. The caregiver and student samples were linked allowing us to merge the datasets and conduct analyses using variables from both the caregiver and student interviews. Table 10 provides descriptive statistics for the caregiver sample. Caregivers who responded to the survey are on average 41.1 years of age and mostly female. The majority are women due to two facts: first, only half the students live with their fathers, and second in general it was easier to find female caregivers available for the survey during the data collection visits, which took place mostly during the mornings and early afternoons. As planned, caregivers are equally split in terms of the sex of the student in their care –half of them are female students- and the standard they are attending. 12 We define caregiver as an adult person responsible for the care of the learner. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 37 Table 10. Caregiver Sample, Summary Statistics Percentage Female 74 Student is female 50 Student attends Standard 5 25 Student attends Standard 6 25 Student attends Standard 7 25 Student attends Standard 8 25 Average Caregiver age 41.1 Caregivers have a relatively low levels of education. Almost 20% have no formal education and more than 70% have not completed primary school. We asked those caregivers who did not finished primary school whether they know how to read and write and only 56% responded affirmatively. Only 5% of the caregivers in the sample have completed secondary education or more. Table 11. Caregiver Education Percentage None 19 Some primary 53 Complete primary 12 Some secondary 9 Complete secondary 4 Higher than secondary 1 We summarize the relationship of caregivers with the students in their care in Table 12. The large majority of the caregivers (78%) are parents of the students in the sample, while 9% are grandparents, 7% are siblings, and 5% are aunts or uncles of the students. Table 12. Caregiver Relationship to Students Percentage Parent 78 Grandparent 9 Aunt/Uncle 5 Sibling 7 Other 1 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR COMMUNITY LEADERS SAMPLE We interviewed the leader of each of the 23 communities we visited. In general, these “town chiefs” (Cammack et al., 2009) identify themselves as the Group Village Headman or Headwoman. Twenty of them are men and only 3 are women. Their ages range from 27 to 78 years, with an average age of 55. Only 2 of these leaders have more than primary education, 5 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 38 completed primary school, and the rest have some primary or have no formal schools. All of them know how to read and write and most of them are farmers. Town chiefs are not associated with the formal government structure or the political system; some are chosen while some are hereditary chiefs. According to Cammack et al. 2009, the village leaders have different functions which include “cultural affairs, administration and management of various sorts, oversight of issues related to land and property, resolving disputes, an involvement in politics, and promoting economic and social development.” Given the importance of the community leaders, we asked them about their own attitudes towards gender norms and we also inquire their opinion about the future of the children and youth in their villages. We asked their opinions about the ideal level of education for males and females, the educational attainment they actually expect their village population to have, their opinions about the ideal ages to get married and have children, among other things. GENDER NORMS ATTITUDES AND EXPECTATIONS ABOUT STUDENTS’ FUTURE In this section we describe students’, caregivers’ and community leaders’ attitudes and expectations about the future of students, focusing in particular on how these differ by respondent sex. We also analyze how these attitudes and expectations are correlated between students and their caregivers. Attitudes towards Gender Norms We asked learners, their caregivers and community leaders about their opions towards gender norms. Gender norms are a set of ideas about how each gender should be and behave that tend to be internalized early in life (UN, 2018). Attitudes and beliefs about gender norms affect adolescent development, the resources and the opportunities children and youth receive (Jayachandran (2015), Saewyc (2017)). As a consequence, gender norms have important implications for girls’ and boys’ health, education, marriage and childbearing, and experiences of violence (Blum et al., (2017)). Understanding the context in which the AMAA school construction program takes place is very important. Many things contribute to access and retention of girls and boys in education and, while having a school close to home might be one of the most important, social norms, among other factors, can highly affect the success of the AMAA program. For example, if parents do not see value in educating their daugthers beyond primary school due to prevalent gender roles and expectations, then the program benefits for girls will be limited. The learner, caregiver, and community leader questionnaires all included a section where the interviewers read 16 statements about different aspects of gender inequality and asked the respondents the extent to which they agreed or disagreed13 with each of them. Responses options were five: 0 (Strongly Agree), 1 (Agree), 2 (Neutral), 3 (Disagree) and 4 (Strongly 13 Statements were adapted from NORC SRGBV Survey - Gender Norms Attitudes, Gender Equitable Men Scale (Instituto Promundo) and Conceptual Framework for Measuring School-Related Gender-Based Violence. Washington, DC: U.S. Agency for International Development. RTI. 2016. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 39 Disagree). In general, neither students nor caregivers or community leaders, expressed attitudes strongly reflective of support for gender equality. The statements can be divided into four sub-categories, grouping together statements on academic ability, gender relations in school, gender roles, and woment’s rights14. The first group of statements refers to academic ability and education value. In Figure 21, we show 4 statements and the percentage of learners and caregivers that agree or strongly agree with the statement. A very large proportion of students and caregivers express a belief that male students are naturally more gifted than female students (Statements 1 and 2), though it is perhaps notable that there is substantially less support for statements expressing a belief that education is less important for females (Statements 3 and 4). Still, a large number of caregivers and students think it is more important for boys to do well in school, and a non-trivial fraction even believe that females should not go to higher education given that they have to get married. Figure 21. Gender Attitudes – Academic Ability and Education Value 11.1 16.5 9.0 7.2 29.3 33.7 39.9 12.0 53.8 61.6 54.1 38.1 44.0 60.1 45.8 33.8 0 20 40 60 % Responding "Agree" or "Strongly Agree" Girls have to get married, so should not go to higher education It is more important for boys to do well in school Boys are naturally better at math and science Boys are usually more intelligent Female Students Male Students Female Caregivers Male Caregivers We presented these same statements to the 23 community leaders we interviewed. Given the small sample size, in this case we do not present these data as percentages but in general the leaders’ views are also biased against females although to a lesser extent than caregivers and sometimes even the students. 14 We present more details about learners’ reponses in Annex V. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 40 Figure 22. Gender Attitudes – Gender Relations in School 7.6 9.4 10.2 8.4 54.2 54.2 39.5 29.6 74.2 71.3 59.9 41.8 35.1 35.7 27.4 11.6 0 20 40 60 80 % Responding "Agree" or "Strongly Agree" It is acceptable for a teacher to get a learner pregnant if he marries her If a teacher sexually harasses a girl, it is her fault Girls provoke boys by wearing short dresses Girls like it when boys tease and make fun of them Female Students Male Students Female Caregivers Male Caregivers Figure 22 presents respondents’ attitudes towards gender relations in school. Most learners and the vast majority of caregivers agree or strongly agree with the statement “girls provoke boys by wearing short dresses”, however the proportion is lower among female students. Also, most caregivers and many learners express agreement with the statement, “It is a girl’s fault if a teacher sexually harasses her”. A smaller percentage agrees with the statement, “It is acceptable for a teacher to get a learner pregnant if he marries her” although 9% agreement could be regarded as very high given the gravity of the statement. To “tease” and “make fun” relate to harassment and emotional abuse, so low agreement on this normative statement may be interpreted as social disapproval of this kind of male behavior. Still a large number of caregivers and learners show agreement. In all cases, female learners disagree most with this set of statements. Notably, female caregivers express agreement at similar levels as male caregivers do. Community leaders also tend to blame girls for provoking boys and even their teachers, although none of them agreed with the statement “It is acceptable for a teacher to get a learner pregnant if he marries her.” The next group of statements presented in Figure 23 related to gender roles. Respondents appear to hold very traditional or gender biased attitudes; an overwhelming majority of students and caregivers thinks that men need more care than women and support traditional roles for women such as cooking and taking care of children. By contrast, the percentage of community leaders who agree with these statements is much lower. The majority of them disagrees with these statements. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 41 Figure 23. Student Responses to Gender Attitude Questions – Gender Roles 63.6 82.7 66.7 71.6 46.7 78.0 63.3 70.7 50.2 66.7 66.4 64.5 0 20 40 60 80 % Responding "Agree" or "Strongly Agree" The most important role for women is to take care of the family and cook Bathing and feeding the children is the responsibility of the mother Men need more care, as they work harder Female Students Male Students Female Caregivers Male Caregivers Figure 24. Student Responses to Gender Attitude Questions – Women’s Rights 62.7 57.8 36.6 36.5 80.4 87.2 85.6 81.3 20.9 29.3 37.6 33.3 9.3 13.6 12.2 13.2 30.2 44.4 41.4 37.1 0 20 40 60 80 % Responding "Agree" or "Strongly Agree" A woman should have the right to divorce A woman should always obey her husband A mother should tolerate violence from the father to keep the family together There are times when a man needs to beat his wife It is unacceptable for a woman to disagree with her husband Female Students Male Students Female Caregivers Male Caregivers PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 42 The final subset of statements focuses on women’s rights and decision power in the household. Figure 24 presents findings. Respondents expressed hostile attitudes towards women’s ability to make important decisions on the direction their lives will take and on having a voice in the household. Around 85% of learners and caregivers recognized the authority of men over women in the household and agree that wives need to obey their husbands. This is a bit less common among community leaders. A large fraction of respondents agrees that wives should tolerate violence from their husbands for the “good” of the family. Even physical violence is justified by a non-trival number of learner and caregivers but none of the community leaders were in agreement with men beating their wives. Despite these highly unequal views a good number of repondents agree with women having the right to divorce. With the exception of this final statement about women’s right to divorce, all of these statements express gender attitudes biased against women. We, therefore, recode the values for this last statement on divorce to make it consistent with the rest, and created an index on respondents’ gender attitudes by taking the sum of scores on the 16 statements. The index has a minimum possible value of 0 (i.e., the respondent scored “0” on all 16 statements) corresponding to highly biased gender attitudes, and a maximum possible value of 64 (i.e., the respondent scored “4” on all 16 statements) corresponding to attitudes highly supportive of gender equality. Finally, so that the index would range from 0 to 1, we divided this sum by 64. Figure 25 shows the distributions for respondents’ views on gender equality, as measured by the gender equality index. The average value for all students is .537, slightly higher than the median value of .531, corresponding to views that would be considered to express “neutral” opinions on the 16 statements, and with a standard deviation of .122. Disaggregating between males and females, female students express views that lean slightly more towards gender equality. The average value for female students is .563 and compares to an average of .511 among male learners. Interestingly, in general, when we examine the gender attitudes of caregivers, male caregivers express views that are slightly less biased than the views of female caregivers. The average value for male caregivers is .547, with a standard deviation of .145, compared to an average of .488 for females, with a standard deviation of .137. It is possible that the group of male caregivers we interviewed is slightly more progressive than the average male caregiver, that they have higher educational attainment than female caregivers (Pulerwitz and Barker, 2007) or that adult men responses to these questions about gender show more social desirability bias than women’s15 (Kumpal, 2013). 15 Social desirability bias refers to the tendency of survey respondents to answer questions in a manner that will be viewed favorably by others. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 43 Figure 25. Gender Equality Index 0 5 10 15 Percent Weak Belief in Equity Strong Belief in Equity Gender Attitudes Students 0 5 10 15 Weak Belief in Equity Strong Belief in Equity Gender Attitudes Caregivers Students' and Caregivers' Attitudes on Gender Equality, by Sex Female Respondents Male Respondents The gender equality index of students and caregivers appear significantly correlated in a statistical sense. Students whose caregivers hold more gender equal attitudes are more likely to have more equal attitudes as well but the correlation is very small between the two values and, of course, this does not imply any causality in the relationship. ASPIRATIONS AND EXPECTATIONS FOR STUDENTS Though research on parents’ and children’s educational aspirations in developing countries is sparse, the existing literature illustrates several patterns. Expectations about education are consistently much higher than the actual educational attainment results. For example, more than 80% of 15-year-old respondents in Peru aspired to attend university, but only 17% of them were actually attending university at age 19 (Guerero, 2016). In Ethiopia, 74% of students surveyed in poor communities aspired to attend university and more than 90% of them thought that it was possible for them to do so (Tafere, 2014). An even higher proportion of parents surveyed in the same study aspired and expected their children to reach high levels of education (Tafere, 2014), however the real educational attaintment in Ethiopia is much lower. Other examples from surveys in the cities of Bogota and La Paz also suggest “unrealistically high (expectations) given current trends” (Forste, 2004). A bevy of other research confirms that parent and student expectations are far higher than national educational attainment averages (Adams, 1987; Chowa, 2007; Beutel, 2007). PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 44 While some scholars argue that such unrealistic expectations must be “reoriented,” (Wellings 1982), other argue high aspirations are important to motivate hard work and orient youth towards desirable goals (Sherwood 1989). A recent study suggests that mothers’ high aspirations in Andhra Pradesh, India led to more school years and higher test scores when controlling for other factors (Serneels and Dercon, 2014). Previous research indicates that the status attainment model, in which educational expectations depend on socio-economic status, and the social support model, where they depend on support from family and friends, play varying roles in shaping expectations in different contexts. A recent experiment in Uganda gave parents Asset Development Accounts and financial training, which increased their wealth and in turn their expectations for their children’s education (Chowa, 2007). Researchers in South Africa ascertained that socioeconomic status and race were significantly correlated with differences in expectations, but family composition was not (Beutel, 2007). In contrast, a study in Uganda found that family size was significantly correlated with secondary school students’ college plans (Adams, 1987). Moreover, academic performance was significantly correlated with educational expectations in several studies (Tafere, 2014; Møller, 1994; Beutel, 2007) but not others (Forstre, 2004). Sex also had variability in its significance, noticeably impacting expectations in several contexts (Tafere, 2014; Serneels, 2014) where expectations are higher for males, but not in others (Beutel, 2007; Adams, 1987; Forstre, 2004). One study found that parental education and socioeconomic status significantly correlated with high school students’ expectations in Bogota, Colombia, where barriers to entry in higher education are higher, but not in La Paz, Bolivia (Forstre, 2004). Therefore, context largely shapes which factors determine student and parent educational expectations. We asked students about their aspirations and expectations regarding their education16. We collected the same information from caregivers and also asked community leaders how they see the future of the youth in their villages. Although education outcomes for students’ older siblings seen previously suggest modest educational achievement for youth in the sampled communities, both students and caregivers express high educational aspirations and expect them to be achieved. These overly optimistic expectations are consistent with the literature. 16 We adapted our questions from the longitudinal Young Lives Survey https://www.younglives.org.uk/ which has been successful at collecting this type of data in several developing countries. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 45 Table 13. Students’ Educational Ambitions and Expectations What is the highest level of formal education would you like to complete? Do you expect to complete that level of education? N Percentage No Yes Standard 8 3 0.17 % 0 3 Form 1 1 0.06 % 1 0 Form 2 1 0.06 % 0 1 Form 3 2 0.11 % 0 2 Form 4 221 12.2 % 4 217 Some vocational/technical school 5 0.28 % 2 3 Vocational/technical school 24 1.32 % 5 19 College or university 1,559 85.8 % 275 1,284 Total 1,816 100 % 287 (16%) 1,529 (84%) Table 13 shows the breakdown of how far students would like to go in school, showing that nearly 86% aspires to complete a university education, and of these, 84% expect to achieve this level of education. An additional 12.2% of students aspires to complete Form 4, with nearly all expressing a belief they will achieve this level of education. As Table 14 shows, caregivers’ aspirations for the students mirror students’ own aspirations closely. Of the caregivers, 17.6% would like students to complete Form 4, while 81.2% would like them to complete university, while of those with these aspirations approximately 90% believe the child will actually complete the respective level of education. Community leaders’ ideal educational attainment is College or University and they did not make differences between males and females. However, they are less optimistic than caregivers and learners about how many boys and girls will be able to go to the University and even finish Form 4. Table 14. Caregivers’ Educational Ambitions and Expectations for Students Ideally what is the highest level of formal education would you like [Child Name] to complete? Do you expect [Child Name] to complete that level of education? N % No Yes Standard 8 1 0.12 % 0 1 Form 2 1 0.12 % 0 1 Form 3 1 0.12 % 0 1 Finish Form 4 153 17.6 % 16 137 Vocational or technical school 7 0.81 % 0 7 College or university 705 81.2 % 68 637 Total 868 100 % 84 (10%) 784 (90%) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 46 These aspirations of learner and caregivers appear significantly correlated in a statistical sense; however, the correlation is low. Students whose caregivers expressed aspirations that the student would complete a university education were 14.5 percentage points more likely to express the same aspirations for themselves. Students and caregivers were also asked about their desires and expectations for reaching other milestones in life, including getting married and having children. A high percentage of students (88.6%) hope to get married, including 86.9% of female students and 90.4% of male students. As Figure 26 shows, male and female students vary little in their aspirations for when they would like to get married, with a median age of 28 for both sexes, and a mean age of 28.37 for females and a mean of 28.54 for males. There is slightly more variation across student sex in the expectations caregivers have for the age students will marry, though the distributions are still quite similar. The average age caregivers expect male students to marry is 30, compared to 29 for female students. Interestingly, there appears to be little correlation between the age students aspire to get married and the age at which caregivers expect them to marry. It is also interesting to note that the ages at which both, learners and their caregivers, expect learners to get married are quite high compared to the current trends in Malawi. According to the World Bank statistics based on the Demographic and Health Survey 2016, 42.1% of women ages 20-24 were first married by age 18 (https://data.worldbank.org). Community leaders’ ideal ages for getting married are lower than caregivers’ and learners’ and a bit closer to the actual trend. On average, they think that 20 and 22 are good ages to marry for females and males, respectively. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 47 Figure 26. Marriage Expectations and Aspirations 0 10 20 30 Percent 10 20 30 40 50 60 Age Age Students Would Like to Get Married 0 10 20 30 0 20 40 60 80 Age Age Caregivers Expect Students to Get Married Female Students Male Students Nearly all students (89.8%) express a desire for having children at some point in their lives, including 88.2% of female students and 91.5% of male students. Those that expressed this desire were asked additional questions about the age they would like to have their first child and the number of children they would ideally like to have. Similarly, all caregivers were asked about the age at which they expected the student to have their first child. Figure 27 shows the age distribution for students’ and caregivers’ expectations. Again, students have similar aspirations regardless of sex, while caregivers expect female students will have their first child earlier. For males, the mean age at which they would like to have their first child is 30.8, compared to 30.4 for females, while the median for both sexes is 30. For caregivers of male students, the mean expected age is 31.8, compared to 30.3 for females, and median ages of 31 and 30 for caregivers of males and females, respectively. For both the caregiver and student samples, we note that the expected ages, regardless of student sex, are considerably later than the ages the students’ older siblings had their first child, as nearly 50% of older sisters had at least one child by age 19, and nearly 50% of older brothers had at least one child by age 24. Again community leaders are somewhat closer to the real trend and, on average, identified 23 and 25 as good ages to have the first child in the case of females and males respectively. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 48 Figure 27. Expectations and Aspirations for Having Children 0 5 10 15 20 25 Percent 10 20 30 40 50 Age Students 0 5 10 15 20 25 10 20 30 40 50 Age Caregivers Expected Age Student Will Have First Child Female Students Male Students Figure 28. Students’ Aspirations for the Number of Children They Will Have 0 1 2 3 4 5 6+ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6+ 0 10 20 30 40 % of Students Female Male How many children would you like to have? PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 49 In addition, we asked expectations about the number of children that learners would like to have. Figure 28 shows students’ aspirations for the number of children they would like to have, disaggregating these aspirations between male and female students. Female students appear to want fewer children than male students (2.99 vs 3.36). Almost 12% of females do not want any children, compared to 8.5% for male students, while 29.7% of female students want 4 or more children, compared to 42.4% of male students. Current fertility rates for Malawi are around 4. Current estimates of fertility rates in Malawi are approximately 4.5 children per woman for the period 2015-2020 (World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision, 2017), higher than the fertility levels these students would like. Finally, we explore students’ and caregivers’ expectations for students’ quality of life in adulthood. We started by asking learners about their current position on a nine-step quality of life ladder, where the first step represented the worst possible life and the ninth step represented the best possible life17 and where they think they would be at age 25. Figure 29 shows the findings. Figure 29. Distribution of Student’s Quality of Life Current and at Age 25. 0 10 20 30 40 Percent Worst Possible Life Best Possible Life Quality of Life Ladder Current At age 25 Students 17 We followed and adapted our questions from the longitudinal Young Lives Survey https://www.younglives.org.uk/ which has been successful at collecting this type of data in several developing countries. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 50 Students evaluate their current situation mostly at the lower half of the scale, however they are quite optimistic about their future, which they place in the higher half of the scale. Most learners expect their lives to improve substantially by the time they are 25 years old. We also ask caregivers where they think their children will situate in the scale in adulthood. Figure 30 shows students’ and caregivers’ expectations side by side and by student sex. It is interesting to note in general students tend to be more optimistic than their caregivers. It is also notable that expectations for female students are more optimistic than expectations for males. Female students tend to place themselves at higher steps of the ladder, particularly at the highest. Caregivers also place female children higher in the expected quality of life scale. Students and caregivers are slightly more likely to express expectations that males will have a quality of life described by Steps 5-8 on the ladder, while a slightly greater proportion of female students and caregivers of female students express expectations that the student will have the best possible life (Step 9). Figure 30. Distribution of Student and Caregiver Expectations for the Student’s Quality of Life in Adulthood, by Student Sex 0 10 20 30 40 Percent Worst Possible Life Best Possible Life Quality of Life Ladder Students 0 10 20 30 40 Worst Possible Life Best Possible Life Quality of Life Ladder Caregivers Female Students Male Students Finally, we run a set of regressions to examine whether students’ aspirations, and their caregivers’ expectations of them, differ depending on a set of student traits. Specifically, we look at how aspirations and expectations differ by whether or not the student is on-track to finish their education according to the official age-by-grade schedule, whether the student PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 51 considers themselves to be a “very good” or “excellent” student, whether or not the student had at least one absence in the week previous to the interview, student sex, and the household asset index. Each regression is run using Ordinary Least Squares (OLS), where the dependent variable is the student’s or the caregiver’s expectation for some specific aspect of the student’s life, and the independent variables are the previously mentioned student characteristics (e.g., on-track studies, “very good” student, etc.). Each column in Table 15 shows how each of these student characteristics are associated with a set of students’ expectations for their own future, while all other characteristics are held constant. Columns 1, 2, and 4 focus on whether or not the student aspires to university studies, ever get married, and ever have children, respectively. Therefore, the estimates in these columns can be interpreted as the change in likelihood that the student declares they have the respective aspiration, given a one unit change in the student characteristic, holding the values of the other student characteristics constant. Columns 3 and 5 correspond to the age at which the student would like to get married and have their first child, respectively. Finally, Columns 6 and 7 correspond to the number of children the student would like to have and the step (from 1 to 9) on the quality of life ladder the student expects to be at when they reach adulthood. The coefficients in Columns 3, 5, 6, and 7 can be interpreted as the change in the aspiration (i.e., the change in the expected age, number of children, or steps on the quality of life later) that is associated with a one unit change in the respective student characteristic, holding the values of the other student characteristics constant. Associations that are statistically significant are indicated by an asterics, but it is important to note that these associations do not imply causality from student’s characteristics to the expectations as reverse causality could be present, and there could be important omitted variables. Whether or not the student was absent at least one day in the previous week and student sex appear to be the most correlated with student aspirations. As seen previously, male students are slightly more likely to express a desire to get married and have children, and express a desire for more children, though on average they have slightly lower expectations for their quality of life in adulthood. On the other hand, students with at least one school absence in the previous week are less likely to express a desire to complete university studies, slightly less likely to express a desire to ever get married, and slightly less likely to express a desire to ever have children. As might be expected, students who consider themselves to be very good or excellent students express a desire to get married and have children slightly later in life, and expect to have a slightly higher quality of life in adulthood. Perhaps surprisingly, those with higher household asset index values, corresponding to those students who come from households that own more things and are likely wealthier, express a desire to get married and have children earlier in life, though they expect a higher quality of life in adulthood. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 52 Table 15. Determinants of Student Expectations and Aspirations for Their Future (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) VARIABL ES Universit y Studies (Dummy) Get Married (Dummy) Marriage (Age) Have Children (Dummy) First Child (Age) Number of Children Quality of Life Ladder On-Track Education 0.04 -0.02 -0.53* -0.02 -0.41 -0.24*** 0.11 (0.02) (0.02) (0.25) (0.02) (0.30) (0.07) (0.09) Very good Student -0.01 -0.002 0.57*** -0.01 0.45** -0.10 0.17* (0.01) (0.01) (0.15) (0.01) (0.17) (0.06) (0.09) Absence last week -0.08*** -0.04** -0.32 -0.04** -0.05 -0.04 -0.05 (0.02) (0.02) (0.19) (0.02) (0.25) (0.07) (0.10) Male Student 0.03 0.03* 0.14 0.03** 0.39 0.35*** -0.18*** (0.02) (0.02) (0.25) (0.01) (0.28) (0.07) (0.06) Asset Index 0.00 0.00 -0.11** 0.00 -0.17*** -0.01 0.12*** (0.00) (0.00) (0.04) (0.00) (0.05) (0.01) (0.02) Obs. 1,817 1,816 1,592 1,814 1,611 1,623 1,810 All regressions are run using OLS. Robust standard errors clustered at the school level in parentheses. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 Table 16 shows how these same traits are correlated with caregiver expectations for the student’s future. The dependent variable in Column 1 is a dummy variable indicating whether or not the caregiver would like the student to complete university studies. Dependent variables in Columns 2-7 describe the age at which the caregiver expects the student to start working, finish full-time education, achieve financial independence from their parent or guardian, leave the household, get married and establish a new household with their husband or wife, and have their first child. Finally, the dependent variable in Column 8 describes the step on the quality of life ladder the caregiver expects the student to be at when they reach adulthood. Student sex and whether or not they are on-track to complete their education according to the official age-by-grade schedule are the traits most highly correlated with these expectations. Caregivers of students with an on-track education are more likely to hold aspirations that the student will complete university studies, although they also expect the student to finish studying full-time at an earlier age, and expect the student will leave the household almost a full year earlier than students whose educations are not on-track according to the official age schedule. Unsurprisingly, and as suggested earlier, caregivers of male students expect the student to leave the household, get married, and have their first child later in life than the caregivers of female students. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 53 Table 16. Determinants of Caregiver Expectations for Student’s Future (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) VARIABL ES Universit y Studies Start Workin g (Age) Finish Educatio n (Age) Financial Indepen dence (Age) Leave Househol d (Age) Marriag e (Age) Have Children (Age) Quality of Life Ladder On-Track Education 0.09*** 0.12 -0.78** -0.59 -0.96** -0.63 -0.73 0.35 (0.03) (0.31) (0.32) (0.40) (0.37) (0.43) (0.48) (0.21) Very good Student -0.04 -0.53 0.004 -0.07 -0.16 0.00 0.14 0.07 (0.02) (0.31) (0.44) (0.29) (0.34) (0.37) (0.38) (0.14) Absence last week -0.05 -0.65 -0.29 0.21 0.16 0.34 0.28 -0.17 (0.04) (0.40) (0.69) (0.45) (0.42) (0.43) (0.43) (0.16) Male Student -0.02 -0.10 -0.23 0.37 0.73** 1.34*** 1.52*** -0.11 (0.02) (0.40) (0.35) (0.29) (0.32) (0.32) (0.32) (0.18) Asset Index 0.01 0.17 -0.015 0.02 -0.05 -0.19 -0.28** 0.08 (0.01) (0.11) (0.10) (0.10) (0.12) (0.13) (0.13) (0.05) Obs. 869 830 823 832 825 818 802 842 All regressions are run using OLS. Robust standard errors clustered at the school level in parentheses. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 BALANCE The purpose of a sample balance check exercise is to verify that respondent characteristics, environmental context, and other measures of interest in the study sample are similar across treatment and control groups at baseline. Demonstrating similarity across the groups at the start of the study establishes credibility that the untreated group will, indeed, be a viable counterfactual to the treated group at endline. We conducted balance checks and include the full details of the significance test results in Table AV.1 in Annex V. We tested a total of 64 variables for balance across the treatment and control arms. Of the 64 significance tests run, only 2 (roughly 3%) showed differences between the treatment and control groups at 10% significance level and none of them showed differences a the conventional 5% significance level. This is a remarkably good balance between our treatment and control groups and suggests that our control group is indeed a very good counterfactural of the treatment group. LIMITATIONS While we have not identified any problems or limitations with the data collection work, there are some limitations inherent to the design of this evaluation. We list some of the more relevant limitations below: Representativeness of the Sample. The sample is representative of the areas where AMAA school construction will take place, in the areas of Machinga and Balaka districts. Therefore, results are PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 54 not directly generalizable at the national level, other geographical areas, or to other school levels. Despite this, we hope the study will be informative and contribute to the evidence regarding secondary school construction, secondary school attendance, and dropouts in developing countries. Longitudinal Attrition and Absenteeism. The evaluation employs a longitudinal design, where we will interview the same learners and teachers at baseline, follow-ups, and endline. Some learners will be still attending school, while others will drop out. Absenteeism rates are, however, high and could present a problem. For dropouts, we plan to visit them at home. All measures available to keep track of learners are in place to reduce attrition. School Sample Size. It should be noted that the nature of the activity necessarily limits our sample size. The sample is large enough to detect improvements in transition to secondary school and primary completion as noted in the Sample Size Section. More challenging can be analyses that are district specific; unless changes are large, estimates will tend to be imprecise. If this is the case, it will be noted and findings will not be taken as conclusive but rather suggestive of a particular trend. In general, however, we expect the sample to be large enough to estimate the expected effects. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 55 CONCLUSIONS In this report we present the findings from the baseline data collected for the evaluation and research study of AMAA secondary school construction, which included interviews with learners, caregivers and community leaders. The baseline data collection did not face any significant challenge. Although the treatment assignment was not planned to be randomized, in practice it ended up being random, due to technical considerations. The data collected during baseline shows a remarkable balance between treatment and control communities indicating that the design selected for this study is highly appropriate and control communities seem to constitute a good counterfactual for the treatment areas. On average, students in our sample are older than expected given the school standard they are attending. This is observed in all the standards from 5 to 8 and is more common among males than females. Students live in a highly deprived environment. Many of them do not have a father present in the household, and have no access to electricity or reading materials. In general, students live far from the schools and report taking, on average, 45 minutes to go from home to school. We collected important information about older siblings of the learners in our sample. These data give us evidence about the trends in the communities. Analyzing these data, we see that although females are more likely to be on track in school, they are more likely to drop out of school before finishing standard 8 and they are less likely to complete secondary education or to attend university than males. Additionally, they are more likely to be married and to have children at earlier ages than their male counterparts. All respondents, students, caregivers and community leaders show very biased gender attitudes, which are particularly prevalent among female caregivers. Despite these attitudes, generally they all aspire to high levels of education for both male and female students. When compared with national trends and even with their own older siblings, students’ expectations about their educational attainment are overly optimistic, which is consistent with the literature from other developing countries. In general, males are more confident about their academic ability than female students and aspire to and expect slightly higher levels of education. Students’ ideal ages for marriage and having children –on average 28 and 30 years, respectively￾are high when compared to current trends in Malawi and to the age of older siblings’ at marriage and first child birth. Caregivers and community leaders expect students to get married and have children at quite older ages as well, although community leaders’ responses are closer to current ages of marriage and first birth. Finally, when asked about their future quality of life, learners, in particular females tend to believe that their quality of life will be substantially better than their current situation. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 56 REFERENCES Adams, B., Wasikhongo J., and Nahemow N. (2014) Socio-economic Status and Educational Aspirations in Uganda, Canadian Journal of African Studies, pp. 221-230. Baird, S. C. McIntosh, and B. Ozler (2011) “Cash or Condition? Evidence from a Cash Transfer Experiment” The Quarterly Journal of Economics (2011) 126, 1709–1753. Beegle, K. and Burke, K. (2004) Why children aren’t attending school: the case of rural Tanzania. Journal of African Economies, 13(2), pp. 333–355. Beutel, Ann, and Anderson, K. (2007) "The educational expectations of South African youth." Sociological Focus, 40(4), pp. 348-369. Blum, Robert W. et al. (2017) “It Begins at 10: How Gender Expectations Shape Early Adolescence Around the World” Journal of Adolescent Health, Volume 61, Issue 4, S3 - S4. Burde, D., and Linden, L. (2013) Bringing Education to Afghan Girls: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Village-Based Schools." American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5 (3): 27-40. Cammack, D., E. Kanyongolo and T. O’Neil (2009) “Town Chiefs in Malawi” Working Paper No. 3, June 2009, Africa Power and Politics Programme (APPP) by the Overseas Development Institute, 111 Westminster Bridge Road, London SE1 7JD, UK Chowa, Gina, and William Elliott III. (2007), Increasing Parental Educational Expectations for Children in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Potential Role of Assets, Centre for Social Development, no. 07-18. Duflo, E. (2001) Schooling and labor market consequences of school construction in Indonesia: evidence from an unusual policy experiment. The American Economic Review, 91(4), pp. 795– 813. Duflo, E. (2004) The medium run effects of educational expansion: evidence from a large school construction program in Indonesia. Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pp. 163-197. Filmer, D. (2007) If you build it, will they come? School availability and school enrolment in 21 poor countries. The Journal of Development Studies, 43:5, pp. 901-928. Forste, R., Heaton, T., and Haas, D., Adolescents’ Expectations for Higher Education in Bogotá, Colombia, and La Paz, Bolivia, Youth & Society, Vol 36, Issue 1, pp. 56 – 76. Guerrero G., Sugimaru C., Cussianovich A., Fraine, B., and Cueto, S. (2016), Education Aspirations among Young People in Peru and their Perceptions of Barriers to Higher Education, Young Lives Working Paper 148 Young Lives, Department of International Development at the University of Oxford. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 57 Handa, S. (2002) Raising primary school enrolment in developing countries: The relative importance of supply and demand. Journal of Development Economics, 69(1), pp. 103–128. Jayachandran, S. (2015) The Roots of Gender Inequality in Developing Countries, Annu. Rev. Econ. 2015. 7:63–88 Kadzamira, E. (2003), Malawi’s Experience in Promoting Girls’ Education, University of Malawi Centre for Educational Research & Training. Kazianga, H., Levy, D., Linden, L., and Sloan, M. (2013) The Effects of "Girl-Friendly" Schools: Evidence from the BRIGHT School Construction Program in Burkina Faso. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(3), pp. 41-62. Keleher, H., Parker, R., Abdulwadud, O. and Francis, K. (2009), Systematic review of the effectiveness of primary care nursing. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 15: 16-24. doi:10.1111/j.1440-172X.2008.01726.x Kendall, N., 2006. Strengthening gender and education programming in the 21st century. In: Equip 2 Working Paper, USAID, Washington, DC. Krumpal, I. Qual Quant (2013) 47: 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9640-9 Lavy, V. (1996) School supply constraints and children’s educational outcomes in rural Ghana. Journal of Development Economics, 51(2), pp. 291–314. Malawi Education Statistics–2015/2016, Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, Directorate of Education Planning, Education Management and Information System. Malawi 2017 PSLCE Results Out, Nyasa Times, https://www.nyasatimes.com/malawi-2017-pslce￾results/. Malawi–Integrated Household Survey 2010-2011, Household Socio-Economic Characteristics Report, National Statistical Office, Republic of Malawi. McConnell, C. and Mupuwaliywa, M. (2016), Keeping Girls in School: Situation Analysis for Malawi, World Bank Group. Miguel, E. and Kremer, M. (2004) Worms: Identifying Impacts on Education and Health in the Presence of Treatment Externalities. Econometrica 72 (1), pp. 159-172 Møller, V. (1994) Home Environment and Educational Motivation and Achievement, Centre for Social and Development Studies, no. 3. Omoeva, Carina and Rachel Hatch, with Benjamin Sylla (2014) “Teenage, Married and Out of School. Effects of early marriage and childbirth on school dropout” FHI 360. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 58 Julie Pulerwitz, J. and G., Barker (2007) “Measuring Attitudes toward Gender Norms among Young Men in Brazil” Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the GEM Scale Saewyc, Elizabeth (2017) “A Global Perspective on Gender Roles and Identity” Journal of Adolescent Health, Volume 61, Issue 4, S3 - S4. Serneels, P. and S. Dercon (2014) Aspirations, Poverty and Education: Evidence from India. Young Lives Working Paper 125, Young Lives, Department of International Development at the University of Oxford. Sherwood, R. (1989) ‘A Conceptual Framework for the Study of Aspirations’, Research in Rural Education’ 6.2: 61–6. Tafere, Y., (2014) “Education Aspirations and Barriers to Achievement for Young People in Ethiopia, Young Lives” Working Paper 120, Young Lives, Department of International Development at the University of Oxford. United Nations (2017), World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision | United Nations Population Division. United Nations, 2018, Gender Statistics Manual. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/genderstatmanual/Glossary.ashx. Wellings, P. (1982), Occupational and Educational Aspirations and Expectations of Kenyan Secondary School Students: Realism and Structural Inequalities, Educational Review 34.3, pp. 253–65. World Bank, (2010), The education system in Malawi, World Bank Working Paper 182, Africa education country status report, World Bank. Younger, S. (2000) The incidence of public services and subsidies in Peru: evidence from household surveys. Cornell Food and Nutrition Policy Program working paper, No. 103, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id/14436602 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 59 ANNEX I: EVALUATION STATEMENT OF WORK STATEMENT OF WORK (DRAFT 3) FOR The Apatseni Mwayi Atsikana Aphunzire (AMAA) Evaluation, Malawi February 22, 2018, updated September 14, 2018 I. PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION: OBJECTIVES, AUDIENCES AND USES Apatseni Mwayi Atsikana Aphunzire (AMAA) is supported by USAID’s Let Girls Learn Challenge Funds awarded by the Office of Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment (E3/GenDev) to Save the Children, Inc. in December 2016. AMAA is implemented by Save the Children Inc. in collaboration with several partners through Cooperative Agreement AID-OAA-A-17-00001. AMAA is currently managed by the E3/Office of Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment. Plans are underway to transfer AMAA management to USAID/Malawi in FY2018. The evaluation of AMAA’s school construction effects is funded by E3/GenDev. The AMAA evaluation operations will be carried out by NORC, through the Reading and Access Evaluations contract (Time and Material): GS-10F-0033M/AID-OAA-M-13-00010. The Reading and Access Evaluations contract is managed by the E3/Office of Education (E3/ED). GenDev’s Advisor for M&E will serve as the Activity Manager of the AMAA evaluation operations. The audiences for this evaluation comprise USAID Operating Units (OU), notably, USAID/Malawi, the Africa Bureau, E3/GenDev, the E3/Education Office; and the E3/ Energy and Infrastructure Office. Other important audiences are the Government of Malawi, primarily, Malawi’s Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MoEST), and donors committed to building and/or supporting schools, such as, Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Department for International Development (DFID), the World Bank and the World Food Program. Save the Children and its implementing partners are key audiences too. AMAA’s Whole-of-Girl programming package is formed of multiple and district specific interventions in five districts. However, this AMAA evaluation focuses only on the set of CDSS construction interventions implemented in two districts, Machinga and Balaka. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 60 The objectives of the AMAA evaluation are to: ■ Review existing evidence on the relationship between new school construction and enrollment as relevant to Malawi, and interpret the findings of the AMAA evaluation in the light of this evidence; ■ Building on the overall AMAA logical framework and theory of change, refine the theory of change for AMAA new Community Day Secondary School (CDSS) construction in collaboration with implementing partners and other stakeholders including USAID/Malawi; ■ Evaluate and report on the effects of the AMAA new CDSS construction relating to completion of primary education by girls and boys, transition of girls and boys from upper primary to the new AMAA CDSSs, and attendance and retention of girls and boys in the new AMAA CDSSs. ■ Examine the effects of AMAA new CDSS construction on perceptions of safety by girls and boys. The evaluation will also assess whether girls, boys, teachers, parents and community members are satisfied with the school construction design and facilities. ■ Assess the USAID and AMAA approach to constructing new CDSSs. The findings, conclusions and recommendations of this evaluation can be applied to future school construction in Malawi and other places. The data generated by this evaluation will contribute toward building the growing body of evidence on the relationship between school construction and enrollment, informing new school construction programming for adolescent girls. 2. SUMMARY INFORMATION Strategy, Project or Activity Name Apatseni Mwayi Atsikana Aphunzire (AMAA) in Malawi Implementer Save the Children, Inc. Cooperative Agreement/Contract # Cooperative Agreement NoAID-OAA-A-17-00003 Total Estimated Ceiling of the Evaluated Project/Activity (TEC) $ 10.5 million Life of Strategy, Project, or Activity December 15, 2016 to September 30, 2020 Active Geographic Regions AMAA will be implemented in five districts in Malawi: Balaka, Machinga, Phalombe, Chikwawa and Mzimba districts. Eleven new schools will be built in the Machinga and Balaka districts. Development Objective(s) (DOs) E3/Office of Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment PAD DO2: Gender-informed approaches scaled in USAID programs and processes. USAID/Malawi, CDCS DO1: Social Development Improved USAID Office E3/Office of Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in partnership with USAID/Malawi PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 61 3. BACKGROUND 3A. Description of the Problem, Development Hypothesis, and Theory of Change 3A.1. The Problem: Since Malawi introduced free primary education in 1994, the numbers of boys and girls enrolling in the first four years of primary school has grown exponentially. Commendable progress has been made towards gender parity at the lower primary level, however, from Standard 5, the number of girls dropping out far surpasses that of boys. For example, while the survival rates to Standard 5 have remained similar for boys and girls (58% and 59% respectively in 2012; 66% and 62% in 2013), the survival rates to Standard 8 have consistently been higher for boys than for girls (41% and 35% respectively in 2012; 35% and 27% in 2013). Girls also tend to fare worse than boys in examinations. As an example, in 2014 73% of boys who sat the Primary School Leaving Certificate Examination (PSLCE) passed compared with 61% for girls18. Only a small percentage of girls and boys who pass are able to go to CDSS due to lack of schools and trained teachers. Although the government tries to maintain an equal selection of girls and boys for CDSS, fewer girls than boys actually complete CDSS due to long distances, lack of school fees, family responsibilities, marriage and pregnancy. In 2015, there were 46,829 boys in Form 4, the last year of CDSS, versus just 38,654 girls19. Many girls are leaving the education system without having attained basic literacy, numeracy or essential life skills, making them more dependent on marriage and a husband’s support. Societal norms that lead to gender inequalities make girls responsible for the majority of household chores, resulting in them arriving late to school, or reducing time for homework, causing them to fall behind. This gender bias and society’s perceptions of what a girl’s role can and should be and what she is capable of, also influences whether a guardian will allocate scarce resources to support a girl’s education. Girls are also more likely to be victims of violence at school, or on the way to and from school. Long distances can prevent both boys and girls from attending school. However, this affects girls differently as the farther a girl has to travel, the greater the concerns for her safety. Parents may be reluctant to allow their daughters to travel long distances, or the girl herself might think school is not worth the additional risk. At school, sexual assault and rape by teachers and classmates is commonplace20. In the Government’s Violence Against Children Survey, 2013, 22.8% of girls (age 13-17) said they had experienced sexual violence in the previous 12 months. Yet victims of physical and sexual violence rarely seek help. Only 14% of girls aged 13-17 said they had sought help after a sexual or physical attack21. 18 Education Management Information System (EMIS) Malawi, 2014 19 EMIS, 2015 20 Malawi Gender Assessment: Gender Based Violence and Girls’ education Outcomes, 2016, US State Department 21 Violence Against Children and Youth survey, 2013 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 62 Sexual violence and abuse, the lack of sexual and reproductive health knowledge and youth friendly services, and girls’ inability to negotiate safe sex due to restrictive gender norms can mean many girls are forced to drop out of school due to pregnancy. Nearly 29% of girls under 19 have started childbearing, an increase of 4% on the previous year22, and a trend that heavily impacts access to upper primary and CDSS, because, as soon as a girl is pregnant she must drop out of school for at least a year23. Additionally, a portion of these girls are married or soon become married; 46% of girls are married before they reach the age of 1924. Girls who do return to school are often quite far behind, and older than peers in their class making it likely they will drop out again. In fact, 75% of all new HIV infections are among adolescent girls and young women25 Due to the prevailing cultural and societal norms26, young girls are the least able to negotiate safe sex, or resist unwanted sexual advances from men, including their teachers. Unprotected sex also puts adolescent girls at risk of contracting HIV. 3A.2. AMAA’s Theory of Change: To address these multiple interlinked barriers that limit a girl’s ability to develop, Save the Children Federation, Inc. (SC), together with its partners Grassroot Soccer (GRS), and Forum for African Women Educationalists – Malawi Chapter (FAWEMA), are implementing Apatseni Mwayi Atsikana Aphunzire (AMAA), which translates in Chichewa to Give Girls a Chance to Learn. The project adopts a “whole of girl approach” in it’s design and interventions. AMAA’s Whole of Girl conceptual approach (Figure 1) recognizes that girls are actors in their own personal development, but contends girls’ development cannot be considered outside a social web of relationships, influential actors, norms and systems: The AMAA theory of change aims at addressing the five main common barriers to girls’ education; school fees, early pregnancy, early marriage, distance to CDSS and lack of space in CDSS. AMAA intends to address these common barriers by delivering three outcomes for improving the girl’s agency and self-efficacy, improving access to education and performance for girls and improving the community support for girls’ education and safety. This will be at the girl as an individual, the family, the community, school and the system level to ensure context specific interventions that fully addresses the different structural problems facing girl’s education in Malawi. 22 Malawi Demographic and Health Survey, 2015-2016 23 Violence Against Children (VAC) Survey, Government of Malawi, 2014 24 UNICEF, State of the World’s Children, 2016 25 DHS 2015 26 Malawi ranks 145 out of 149 countries on the UN’s Gender Inequality Index, according to the HDI 2016 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 63 Figure 1: AMAA Theory of Change Diagram: The Whole of Girl Approach 3B. Summary Strategy/Project/Activity/Intervention to be evaluated 3B.1. The Let Girls Learn Whole-of-Girl Approach: In March 2015, the U.S. Government launched Let Girls Learn (LGL), a global initiative which builds upon existing efforts and invests in new programs to expand education for adolescent girls. LGL seeks to ensure that adolescent girls around the world are able to access quality education enabling them to reach their full potential. LGL activities adopt a Whole-of-Girl approach by recognizing that multiple solutions are needed to address the complex challenges faced by girls. Barriers to girls’ education pose formidable challenges. The Whole-of-Girl approach is based on the recognition that discriminatory gender norms motivate some parents to invest in educating their sons rather than their daughters. Girls attending school risk harassment and violence on their way to school and in school. Girls drop out of school owing to pregnancy and early marriage. In some contexts, parents and teachers tend to support boys rather than girls to make headway in their studies and careers. Whole-of￾Girl interventions foster an enabling environment for adolescent girls’ education, safety and well-being, wherein girls increase self-efficacy and are valued by their families, communities and other institutions. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 64 3B.2. AMAA: AMAA is delivering a range of district specific activities in Malawi to mitigate the barriers to girls’ enrollment and retention in school. The project works in five priority districts targeting over 60,000 girls aged 10-19 in both upper primary and CDSSs . Led by Save the Children, AMAA works with local and international NGOs, as well as Peace Corps, the World Food Program and the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MoEST) in Malawi to mitigate the barriers preventing girls’ enrollment and retention in school. AMAA developed a package that includes targeted yet competitive bursaries, construction of CDSSs, extracurricular and in school activities to empower girls and strategies to transform gender norms and reduce school-related gender based violence (SRGBV). The AMAA project focuses on the reduction of early and child marriage and teen pregnancy for the purpose of increased school access, performance and retention. For girls’ to achieve academic success, they must enter school, stay in school, be learning while in school, and be healthy and supported by their community at all times. AMAA implements a coordinated set of interventions with the following activities: ■ increasing access to schools and safety for girls by constructing of one 50-bed girls’ dormitory and eleven new CDSSs; protecting girls from gender-based violence by improving reporting and referral systems; and involving fathers from the community in AMAA “Real Fathers” program on building healthy father-daughter relationships; ■ offering additional learning opportunities and support for all adolescent girls to continue their education by establishing school buddies for girls who are caring for babies; and training male and female teachers to inspire and support girls to remain in school; and ■ ensuring that girls are receiving a practical, high quality education by improving the academic and teaching performance of teachers in English, science and math; and inviting girls to yearly science and math camps. 4. EVALUATION QUESTIONS The evaluation questions broadly fall into two categories. The Part 1 evaluation questions focus on the effects of AMAA new CDSS construction on girls, boys, parents, teachers and communities. It’s essential for the evaluation team to define key terms in consultation with USAID and Save the Children. These key terms include, school “retention”, “transition”, “completion, “drop-out”, “repetition”,and “held-back” etc. The evaluation team should also specify the physical and socio-emotional aspects of safety (Q.5) and the attributes of school design (Q.7) that will be assessed by beneficiaries. The Part 2 evaluation question focuses on assessing the AMAA approach to new school construction. The areas of inquiry for this question should be determined in consultation with USAID and Save the Children. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 65 4A. PART 1: These evaluation questions27 will capture the effects of AMAA’s new CDSS construction interventions on beneficiary girls, teachers, parents, and communities. Question 1: What effect does embedding a new CDSS in a community have on primary school completion and transition; and CDSS enrollment, attendance, promotion and retention of girls and boys in the community? Question 2: (a) What effect does embedding a new CDSS in a community have on the attitudes and expectations of girls, boys, parents and communities in the areas served by the new AMAA constructed new schools regarding: ■ Primary school retention and completion and transition to CDSSs? ■ Interest in continuing girls’ and boys’ education and/or vocational training ■ Marriage and pregnancy ■ Future work/employment/career. (b) What are the attitudes and expectations of (1) girls and boys who have dropped out of school; and (2) girls and boys who are in the new CDSSs regarding: ■ Perceived value of attending school and education as experienced thusfar ■ Future education Marriage and pregnancy ■ Future work/employment/career Question 3: What are the reasons for girls and boys to: (a) drop out of school; (b) repeat, and (c) be held back? Question 4: How are the CDSSs helping girls to overcome identified barriers, such as: education costs, early pregnancy, early marriage, lack of WASH facilities, distance to CDSS, and lack of space in CDSSs? Are there additional barriers to accessing schools faced by girls? Question 5: (a) What effect do the new CDSSs have on the perceptions of learners regarding physical and socio-emotional aspects of safety? (b) What are the perceptions of girls and boys dropping out of school regarding physical and socio-emotional aspects of safety? Question 6: What experience do new CDSSs have on attracting and retaining teachers? 27 The AMAA evaluation questions are focused on the AMAA new secondary school construction package. This package supports AMAA IR 1.1 Improved secondary school enrollment. In 2018-19, AMAA is building 11 new secondary schools, five in the Machinga district and 6 in the Balaka district. The school buildings will be contructed by an engineering company. The community will be involved in building the latrines and the teachers’ quarters. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 66 Question 7: Are girls, their parents/guardians, and community members satisfied with the building facilities of the new schools? 4B. PART 2: This evaluation question will assess the AMAA approach to constructing schools in Malawi Evaluation.Q.8: Assess the approach adopted by AMAA to construct schools in Malawi. How were challenges overcome? What are the strengths and limitations of the school construction experience? What are the promising practices and lessons for USAID and its partners?28 5. EVALUATION DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY The evaluation team is tasked with designing and implementing an evaluation of AMAA new CDSS construction in Malawi’s Machinga and Balaka districts. The evaluation designs for Part 1 and Part 2 of the evaluation should be developed in consultation with USAID and the AMAA team. 5A. AMAA Evaluation Part 1 The evaluation team will design Part 1 of this evaluation and also conduct Part 1 baseline data collection and reporting in 2018. To answer the Part 1 evaluation questions, the AMAA evaluation team will adopt a mixed methods approach tailored to answering each evaluation question. This will involve collecting qualitative and quantitative data through literature review, document analysis including existing administrative records, surveys, key informant interviews, and focus groups. Malawi’s Education Management Information System (EMIS) is an important source of administrative data on school enrollment and attendance. The evaluation design should leverage EMIS and attendance information maintained by schools if and when appropriate and feasible. The literature review should draw upon existing research on secondary school attendance in Malawi, Africa and even globally as relevant to the problems and opportunities faced by the students in Machinga and Phalombe, Malawi. The evaluation team could apply a quasi-experimental design using treatment and comparison groups to answer some of the Part 1 evaluation questions. If a quasi-experimental design is used, the treatment group(s) would be drawn from the communities living in areas adjacent to the new schools. The treatment groups should comprise girls and boys likely to transfer to the new CDSSs and those who have transitioned successfully to the new CDSSs. The control or comparison groups would be drawn from areas that are similar to the treatment areas on key attributes, but currently do not have CDSSs close to primary schools. The analysis and presentation of data gathered in response to the Part 1 evaluation questions should be informed by the literature and available evidence on school enrollment and retention, if the studies are relevant to Malawi. 28 The Part 2, Evaluation Question 8, will be further elaborated when the Part 2 evaluation design works starts based on the schedule for completing school construction in the Machinga and Balaka districs. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 67 5B. AMAA Evaluation Part 2 Part 2 AMAA evaluation planning work will begin after the CDSSs are built in the Machinga and Balaka districts. This SOW will be updated to include more details regarding the terms of reference for Part 2. To answer the Part 2 evaluation question, the evaluation team will analyze relevant documents, such as, AMAA school construction proposal(s), work-plan(s) and budgets, Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) records and site specific Environmental Monitoring and Mitigation Plans (EMMP), the AMAA progress reports to USAID, documentation relating to procurement, school construction designs (drawings and specifications) and contractor/community plans. For Part 2 of the AMAA evaluation, the evaluation team will also gather information from USAID staff and non-USAID stakeholders. The USAID stakeholders include the Malawi Mission, the Africa Bureau, E3/GenDev, E3/Education, E3/Environment offices, E3/Energy and Infrastructure, E3/Water. The non-USAID stakeholders include Save the Children and AMAA staff, key personnel from Malawi’s Ministry for Education, Science and Technology (MoEST) and other Malawi government agencies supporting school construction; community members and donors engaged in secondary school construction in Malawi. 5C. Research Context To optimize learning from this evaluation, in the Part 1 and Part 2 evaluation reports, the evaluation team will cogently summarize relevant research findings on adolescent girls relating to, for example: ■ The effects of secondary school education on girls’ wellbeing, aspects of empowerment, future livelihoods, and earnings; and ■ School construction designs that facilitate positive learning environments and safety for girls. The research findings could be as applicable, sourced by wide-ranging studies that address girls’ secondary education effects and issues at the global, regional or country levels. The audiences for this evaluation should be able to understand the AMAA evaluation findings in the context of these research findings. 5D. Evaluation Tasks In alignment with the requirements and standards in Section C: Scope of Work of the Reading and Access contract, the evaluation team will undertake and complete the following tasks, including: ■ Finalize the Part 1 and Part 2 evaluation questions drafted to-date in consultation with USAID and AMAA team; ■ Prepare the Evaluation Design Report and the corresponding evaluation work-plan and detailed evaluation budget using the templates recommended by the E3/Education R&A Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). The Evaluation Design Report should: PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 68 o Describe the evaluation methodology to collect and analyze quantitative and qualitative data, and disaggregate data by sex, age and other relevant variables; o Provide information on the sampling frame, power calculations, control and treatment groups; o Discuss internal and external validity and how generalizable the results will be; o Identify the strengths and limitations of the proposed methodology as well as evaluation implementation challenges and proposed solutions. o Discuss the approach to optimizing cost-efficiency; o Describe the plan to leverage local knowledge to benefit the evaluation team; o Describe the data collection tools for the surveys, focus group discussions and key informant interviews; o Use the evaluation report template(s) recommended by the R&A COR. ■ Prepare the data collection tools; ■ Recruit and deploy an evaluation implementation team with the recommended qualifications, including Malawian nationals; ■ Implement the AMAA evaluation (Part 1 and Part 2) in close consultation with USAID and the AMAA team; ■ Report the findings, conclusions and findings of the AMAA evaluation in the context of the needs of adolescent girls in Malawi and the AMAA school construction experience; and ■ Implement the activities to learn from the AMAA evaluation’s findings, conclusions and recommendations during the baseline, midline and end-line stages. 6. DELIVERABLES AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 6A. Deliverables With reference to the requirements for deliverables in the Reading and Access Evaluations contract, the evaluation team will deliver the following products: ■ In 2018 by March 31st, an Evaluation Design Report with a work-plan and detailed budget for the AMAA evaluation with an in-house presentation on the evaluation design to USAID and the AMAA team using audio-visual media to connect audiences; ■ The set of data collection tools; ■ Briefings for USAID/Malawi and AMAA team during data collection visits in Malawi; ■ In 2018, by November 30, a draft Part 1 baseline report, the final baseline report and a presentation to USAID and the AMAA team, using audio-visual media to connect audiences; ■ In 2019 by September 30, a draft Part 2 evaluation report, the final Part 2 evaluation report and presentation to USAID and the AMAA team, using audio-visual media to connect audiences; PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 69 ■ In 2021, byJune 30, a draft Part 1 end-line report and the final Part 1 end-line evaluation report with an in-house presentation to USAID and the AMAA team, using audio-visual media to connect audiences; ■ In 2021 by August 27, a 2 page summary Briefing Note ■ In 2021 by September 8, hold a webinar on the evaluation’s findings, conclusions and recommendation for Agency-wide stakeholder audiences and post the webinar recording on Agency web sites recommended by USAID. 6B. Reporting The evaluation reports (Part 1 baseline, Part 2 final report, and Part 1 end-line) will discuss the AMAA evaluation’s findings, conclusions and recommendations in the context of the needs of girls in Malawi and the AMAA school construction experience. Each evaluation report (Part 1 baseline, Part 2 final report, and Part 1 end-line) should contain the following components: ■ Executive Summary; ■ Introduction (including evaluation purpose, audience, anticipated uses, and questions); ■ Program Background (overview of the needs of adolescent girls in Malawi, the AMAA Project and the AMAA new school construction activities); ■ Methodology (overview of data collection and analysis methods, including limitations, anticipated challenges and solutions); ■ Findings, conclusions and recommendations for each evaluation question in the context of research findings, the relevant needs of adolescent girls in Malawi, and the AMAA school construction experienceimplementation experience; and ■ Annexes (including evaluation SOW, references, list of respondents, and data collection instruments). The AMAA evaluation reports will meet the evaluation quality criteria described in the USAID Evaluation Policy (see text box below): PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 70 USAID EVALUATION POLICY, APPENDIX 1 CRITERIA TO ENSURE THE QUALITY OF THE EVALUATION REPORT • The evaluation report should represent a thoughtful, well-researched and well organized effort to objectively evaluate what worked in the project, what did not and why. • Evaluation reports shall address all evaluation questions included in the scope of work. • The evaluation report should include the scope of work as an annex. All modifications to the scope of work, whether in technical requirements, evaluation questions, evaluation team composition, methodology or timeline need to be agreed upon in writing by the technical officer. • Evaluation methodology shall be explained in detail and all tools used in conducting the evaluation such as questionnaires, checklists, and discussion guides will be included in an Annex in the final report. • Evaluation findings will assess outcomes and impact on males and females. • Limitations to the evaluation shall be disclosed in the report, with particular attention to the limitations associated with the evaluation methodology (selection bias, recall bias, unobservable differences between comparator groups, etc.). • Evaluation findings should be presented as analyzed facts, evidence and data and not based on anecdotes, hearsay or the compilation of people’s opinions. Findings should be specific, concise and supported by strong quantitative or qualitative evidence. • Sources of information need to be properly identified and listed in an annex. • Recommendations need to be supported by a specific set of findings. • Recommendations should be action-oriented, practical, and specific, with defined responsibility for the action. 7. EVALUATION TEAM COMPOSITION Within the Labor Categories described in the Reading and Access Evaluations contract, NORC will select an evaluation team that includes a Principal Investigator, statistician(s), gender in education specialist(s), architect/engineer, administrative associate(s), and in-country data collectors. In alignment with the requirements and standards in Section C: Scope of Work of the Reading and Access Evaluations contract, the AMAA evaluation team is tasked with designing and implementing an the evaluation to answer the Part 1 and Part 2 in consultation with USAID and the AMAA team. The WW evaluation team will collectively reflect the following qualifications scaled appropriately to senior, mid-level and junior levels: ■ Graduate degree(s) in the social sciences; ■ Expertise in applying a variety of methods to gather and analyze quantitative and qualitative data, as well as designing and implementing impact evaluations and performance evaluations; ■ Knowledge of USAID’s performance monitoring and evaluation guidance; ■ International development programming experience; ■ Demonstrated experience in gender equality and women’s empowerment and/or programming; ■ Specialist knowledge on the needs of adolescent girls and education systems in Malawi; PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 71 ■ Professional architect/engineer qualifications with knowledge of USAID’s construction standards and extensive school construction experience; ■ Experience in managing projects/activities funded by USAID; ■ Specialist expertise in working with databases, and software to collect and analyze data and to disseminate findings; ■ Data collection, data analysis, report writing and communication skills, including languages spoken in the WW implementation areas; and ■ Excellent ability to work collaboratively with evaluation team members, USAID, WEI/B and its partners. The Evaluation Design Report will propose the staffing plan for this evaluation, including, specific positions and CVs for proposed individuals to serve in the evaluation team positions. Each evaluation team member will sign USAID’s conflict of interest statement before conducting any documentary or field research. To leverage local knowledge, the contractor is encouraged to use host-country evaluation specialists with the requisite qualifications. 8. PART 1 EVALUATION SCHEDULE29 DELIVERABLES PERIOD 1. Submit draft Part 1 Evaluation Design Report March 23, 2018 2. Submit final Part 1 Evaluation Design Report, incorporating USAID’s feedback on the draft 10 business days after receiving written feedback from all USAID stakeholders and implementing partner on the draft EDR 3. Prepare Part 1 baseline data collection tools and gather baseline data from learners, parents and community leaders May, 2018 4. Submit draft Part 1 Baseline Report September 5, 2018 5. Hold presentation on the Part 1 Baseline Report to USAID and IP audiences November 13, 2018 6. Submit Part 1 final Baseline Report 10 business days after receiving written feedback from all reviewers on the draft report 7. Collect administrative data from learners May 2018, March 2019, March 2020, March 2021 8. Conduct mid-line and endline surveys on learners May 2018, March 2021, May 2021 9. Conduct interviews with school drop-outs March 2019, March 2020, March 2021 10. Conduct survey on endline survey on parents March 2021 11. Collect data from community leaders March 2021 29 This SOW will be updated in the future based on the schedule for completing school construction in the Machinga and Balaka districts. The updated SOW will include the deliverables and evaluation schedule of Part 2 of the evaluation. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 72 DELIVERABLES PERIOD 12. Gather information from teachers and administrative data on teachers March 2019, March 2020, March 2021 13. Hold focus-group discussions with girls and parents March 2020 14. Submit draft Part 1 endline evaluation report June 30, 2021 15. Hold presentation(s) on the draft Part 1 evaluation report’s findings, conclusions and recommendations to USAID audiences and the IPs July 2021 16. Submit final Evaluation Report 10 business days after receiving written feedback from all USAID stakeholders on the draft report 17. Prepare 2-page briefing note August 27, 2021 18. Hold webinar on the final evaluation report’s findings, conclusions and recommendations September 8, 2021 9.OTHER REQUIREMENTS All quantitative data collected by the evaluation team must be provided in machine-readable, non-proprietary formats as required by USAID’s Open Data policy (see ADS 579). The data should be organized and fully documented for use by those not fully familiar with the project or the evaluation. USAID will retain ownership of the survey and all datasets developed. All modifications to the required elements of the SOW of the contract/agreement, technical requirements, evaluation questions, evaluation team composition, methodology, or timeline, need to be agreed upon in writing by the COR. Any revisions should be updated in the SOW that is included as an annex to the Evaluation Report. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 73 ANNEX II: EVALUATION METHODS AND LIMITATIONS SAMPLING STRATEGY NORC took advantage of the site selection process that considered a group of similar communities as candidates for treatment. Treatment was only assigned to a subgroup of communities, allowing NORC to draw comparison groups from the rest of the list. The Treatment communities’ selection process is detailed below, followed by NORC’s process in selecting Comparison communities. The selection of Treatment communities that will receive the AMAA secondary schools was done by a committee made up of USAID/Malawi, Save the Children, and MoEST officials, and was supported by technical teams. USAID/Malawi selected the initial pool of candidate communities using the following criteria: ■ Primary school pass rate ■ Standard 8 enrollment ■ Located at least 10km from Community Day Secondary School (CDSS) The selection committee visited these communities to meet with the primary school head teacher, community/school structures and community leaders and conduct a community assessment. The committee then selected communities from this list based on their own preferences. Each selected community was then assessed on technical suitability with respect to the following criteria: ■ Large enough to cater for the size of the structures to be constructed ■ Land voluntarily donated by the community and land user ■ Not owned by the church ■ Soil suitable for construction ■ Nearby water source ■ Environmental impact of the construction Some selected communities were rejected on technical grounds and had to be replaced by others in the original list of candidates. This occurred several times, giving the selection process a high degree of (unintended) randomness and allowing the evaluation team to use the initial list as a source for selecting comparison communities. There are two important points to note: (1) none of these technical construction criteria are likely to have any direct impact on the outcomes of interest in this evaluation and therefore are unlikely to create any bias, and (2) treatment and comparison communities do not need to be identical, as the methodology uses statistical approaches to deal with differences if necessary. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 74 A. Machinga District During the initial selection process the committee considered a total of 14 communities: Chisani, Kalambo, Kayuni, Matanda, Mkotamo, Msasa, Mwalasi, Nansato, Nkasaulo, Ntalala, Nyenyezi, Thobola, Msasa, Ntulira, and Nathendo. From this list, the committee initially selected the following communities in Machinga to receive the secondary school construction treatment: Kayuni, Matanda, Mkotamo, Mwalasi, and Ntalala. NORC then selected 4 comparison communities from the initial list of candidates, discarding several communities because their close proximity to treatment sites. The four communities selected to be used as comparison were: Nkasaulo, Nansato, Ntulira, and Nathendo. None of them are located within 10km from an existing or planned Community Day Secondary School (CDSS). To create an even number with the treatment groups, NORC needed to add one additional comparison site, so Chisese was selected using the same criteria USAID/Malawi used in creating the initial list of candidate communities (i.e., primary school enrollment, primary certification pass rate, and distance from Community Day Secondary Schools (CDSS)). Table AII.1 shows each community’s enrollment of boys and girls in standard 8, primary school pass rate in numbers and in percentages, and whether the community is in the treatment or comparison group. Table 17. Treatment and Comparison Communities in Machinga District Communities Considered for Treatment* Name of Community Standard 8 Enrollment Primary School Pass Rate Male Female Total Male Female Total % Group Chisani 44 24 68 39 12 51 75% Matanda 33 30 63 19 12 31 49% Treatment Mwalasi 30 24 54 20 15 35 65% Treatment Msasa 61 40 101 44 33 77 76% Ntulira 32 12 44 16 1 17 39% Comparison Kalambo 41 48 89 27 25 52 58% Mkotamo 41 61 102 24 17 41 40% Treatment Thobola 23 34 57 19 29 48 84% Nansato 15 15 30 13 12 25 83% Comparison Ntalala 19 19 38 17 11 28 74% Treatment Kayuni 39 29 68 25 13 38 56% Treatment Nyenyezi 21 20 41 17 8 25 61% Mkasaulo 37 35 72 30 27 57 79% Comparison Nathendo 22 30 52 16 15 31 60% Comparison Comparison Community Selected Using Matching Chisese 22 24 46 18 13 31 67% Comparison * Considered as potential treatment communities by USAID/Malawi, SC, and Malawi education officials. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 75 B. Balaka District The selection of treatment and control communities in the district of Balaka followed the same approach used in Machinga. The original communities under consideration were: Ng'onga, Chilanga, Makanjira, Ngwengwe, Nagulukitiche, Namikombe, Ntalikachao, Muthe, Thundu, Njerenje, Mitengwe, Namichere, and Chikoleka. From this list, the committee chose Chilanga, Makanjira, Namikombe, Nagulukitiche, Njerenje, and Namichere for treatment. However, on May 9, we were informed that Nagulukitiche could not be considered for treatment as it was closer to Chilanga than desirable. The site was then replaced by Ngwengwe. However, this community was also rejected and then replaced by Muthe. NORC then selected the following comparison communities by the same method used in Machinga: Ng’onga, Ngwengwe, Nagulukitiche, Thundu, Mitengwe, and Chikoleka. On May 28, after the baseline data collection took place, NORC learned that Muthe was no longer deemed feasible for construction and thus the communities of Chawanda, Mzimundilinde, and Njese were under consideration as replacement treatment sites. On June 26, NORC learned that the replacement site would be Mzimundilinde. NORC worked with local partner Invest in Knowledge (IKI) to collect data in this new site and add it to the evaluation. NORC had already collected data in Muthe during the baseline and decided to include Muthe as a comparison community, increasing the number of comparison communities to sevexn. Table AII.2 shows each community’s enrollment of boys and girls in standard 8, primary school pass rate in numbers and in percentages, and whether the community is in the treatment or comparison group. Table 18. Treatment and Comparison Communities in Balaka District Communities Considered for Treatment* Name of Community Standard 8 Enrollment Primary School Pass Rate Male Female Total Male Female Total % Group Ng'onga 27 25 52 22 24 46 89% Comparison Chilanga 29 15 44 27 13 40 90% Treatment Makanjira 12 17 29 12 15 27 93% Treatment Ngwengwe 10 14 24 10 14 24 100% Comparison Namikombe 17 17 34 15 17 32 94% Treatment Nagulukitiche 18 22 40 15 18 33 82% Ntalikachao 30 35 65 26 26 52 80% Comparison Muthe 47 32 79 40 25 65 82% Comparison Thundu 17 33 50 10 23 33 66% Comparison Njerenje 21 24 45 18 20 38 84% Treatment Mitengwe 41 39 80 35 25 60 75% Comparison Namichere 24 22 46 24 21 45 97% Treatment Chikoleka 45 43 88 40 41 81 92% Comparison Mzimundilinde 19 20 39 19 20 39 100% Treatment * Considered as potential treatment communities by USAID/Malawi, SC and Malawi education officials. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 76 Table 19. Evaluation Matrix Question Data Collection Activity Data Type/s Indicators Location and Group Date Analyses Q1. What effect does embedding a new CDSS in a community have on (1) primary school completion and transition; and (2) secondary school enrollment, attendance, promotion and retention of girls and boys in the community? Learners - Administrative School Data Learners Survey Longitudinal data learners; tracking 2018 cohort Std5-Std8 CENSUS Longitudinal data learners; tracking 80 learners per school Enrollment, promotion, repetition, completion, and transition to secondary school Socio-demographic and economic background, older sibling information, HHLD contact information Machinga and Balaka Treatment and Comparison May 2018 Mar 2019 Mar 2020 Mar 2021 Regression analysis with controls and/or propensity score matching Survival analysis Panel data analysis Q2a. What effect does embedding a new CDSS in a community have on the attitudes and expectations of girls, boys, parents and communities in the areas served by the new AMAA constructed new schools regarding: • Primary school retention and completion and transition to secondary schools; • Interest in continuing girls’ and boys’ education and/or vocational training; • Marriage and pregnancy; and • Future work/employment/career? Learners Survey Parents expectations and attitudes survey Community leaders Repeated cross sections of learners, and parents KII Gender & Education attitudes and expectations Balaka Treatment and Comparison May 2018 Mar 2021 Difference in Difference Descriptive Analysis Q2b. What are the attitudes and expectations of (1) girls and boys who have dropped out of school; and (2) girls and boys who are in the new CDSSs regarding: Learners survey and dropouts interviews Longitudinal data learners; tracking 80 learners per school Gender & Education attitudes and expectations Machinga and Balaka Treatment and Comparison May 2018 After drop out event Mar 2021 Descriptive analysis PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 77 Question Data Collection Activity Data Type/s Indicators Location and Group Date Analyses • Perceived value of attending school and education as experienced thus-far; • Future education; • Marriage and pregnancy; and Future work/employment/ career Q3. What are the reasons for girls and boys to: (1) drop out of school; (2) repeat; and (3) be held back? Dropout (repetition, etc.) interview Teacher interview Longitudinal data learners; tracking 80 learners per school Reasons for dropout, current situation Reasons for repetition, being held back Machinga and Balaka Treatment and Comparison Mar 2019 Mar 2020 Mar 2021 Regression analysis with controls and/or matching Panel Data Analysis Descriptive Analysis Q4. How are the CDSSs helping girls to overcome identified barriers, such as: education costs, early pregnancy, early marriage, lack of WASH facilities, distance to secondary school, and lack of space in secondary schools? Are there additional barriers to accessing schools faced by girls? Household interview for dropout girl learners Parents and girls FGDs Longitudinal data learners; tracking 80 learners per school Qualitative Data Reasons for dropout. Current situation Challenges and advantages faced by parents and girls Machinga and Balaka Treatment Mar 2019 Mar 2020 Mar 2021 Mar 2020 Panel Data Descriptive Analysis Phenomenological analysis of Qualitative Data Q5a. What effect do the new CDSSs have on the perceptions of learners regarding physical and socio-emotional aspects of safety? 5b. What are the perceptions of girls and boys dropping out of school regarding physical and socio-emotional aspects of safety? Interviews with learners Dropout interview Learners in the baseline sample still attending schools (Form 1 to 3) Learners in the baseline sample that dropped out of school Learner perception of safety around school/ going to school Perceptions of safety for those out of school Machinga and Balaka treatment and comparison Machinga and Balaka treatment and comparison Mar 2021 After dropout event and Mar 2021 Descriptive Analysis Descriptive Analysis PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 78 Question Data Collection Activity Data Type/s Indicators Location and Group Date Analyses Q6. What experience do new CDSSs have on attracting and retaining teachers? Teacher Roster Teacher Interviews Longitudinal Data Secondary School Teachers-ALL Turnover, job satisfaction, vacancies, etc. Machinga and Balaka Treatment Mar 2019 Mar 2020 Mar 2021 Descriptive analysis Q7. Are girls, their parents/guardians, and community members satisfied with the building facilities of the new schools? Learners and parents surveys - School building satisfaction SUB-SAMPLE (30 learners per secondary school, 10 in each Form) and their parents (25 approx.) Satisfaction with the school building Machinga and Balaka Treatment Mar 2021 Descriptive Analysis PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 79 METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW The evaluation and research design includes different methods depending on the question to be addressed. Some questions will be answered using quantitative data only, but other questions will require the use of qualitative information. In some cases, quantitative and qualitative data will complement each other to gain details and understanding. While for some questions it will be possible to identify causal effects using a quasi-experimental approach, other questions are more suitable for descriptive data analyses. The information to be used will be gathered from learners, parents, teachers and others in communities where the secondary schools were built (Treatment) and in communities that do not have secondary schools but are similar otherwise (Comparison). The sampling strategy can be found in Annex II. Below, we describe our approach to answering each of the research and evaluation questions. Question 1: What effect does embedding a new CDSS in a community have on (1) primary school completion and transition; and (2) secondary school enrollment, attendance, promotion and retention of girls and boys in the community? We will answer the question by comparing primary school completion rates, rates of transition to secondary school, attendance, promotion and retention of learners between treatment communities and comparison communities. We propose to do this in two ways: A) Using existing school administrative data (or creating the system to collect the necessary data) we will track the all the learners (Census) attending standard 5, 6, 7, and 8 at the time of our baseline in May 2018. We will collect data yearly on these students, following those who transfer into the new secondary schools and create a panel to track them. These longitudinal data will allow us to calculate promotion and retention rates in secondary school, as well primary school completion rates. We could also learn which students take the primary school certification exam, and if they end up being admitted to secondary school. In addition, we will explore the feasibility of obtaining attendance data. This strategy allows us to assess the causal impact of school construction on the indicators of interest in question 1 and, given that administrative school data includes all learners, it allows us to maximize the precision of our estimates. However, administrative data has shortcomings. Firstly, while it will be possible to use primary and secondary school administrative data in treatment communities, comparison communities will lack secondary school data. Secondly, administrative data does not include information about the learners and their backgrounds other than very basic characteristics, such as sex. More detailed information will be needed to carry out our analysis. B) For a sample of learners (Sample), in treatment and control communities, we will complement the tracking enrollment data with a baseline survey to collect information on socio-demographic characteristics of the learner, disability status, socio-economic situation of his or her household, household contact information, and information on older siblings. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 80 The sample data will permit us to do several things: 1) use the household contact information to continue tracking learners in comparison communities after they finish standard 8, allowing us to see their transition into secondary school and their promotion and retention in the years to follow; 2) use household contact information to reach learners that drop out of schools (see Questions 3 and 4); and 3) understand how the educational path of boys and girls may differ depending on learners’ individual circumstances, such as their age or household financial situation, something that cannot be done with just school administrative data. As Table AII.4 shows below, boys and girls that are in standard 8 at baseline could remain in the school system until the end of our study in March 2021, and could potentially reach form 3. Similarly, those students in standard 7 and 6, could potentially reach form 2 and 1, respectively, at endline. Learners in standard 5 may be able to reach standard 8. Table AII.4. Potential Progress for Learners May-18 Mar-19* Mar-20* Mar-21* Std 8 Form 1 Form 2 Form 3 Std 7 Std 8 Form 1 Form 2 Std 6 Std 7 Std 8 Form 1 Std 5 Std 6 Std 7 Std 8 * Tentative date In order to minimize attrition, the NORC team proposes, tracking the status of the learners annually until the endline (planned for 2021). Analytically, to evaluate the impact of the program on, for example, enrollment for the average learner in a treatment community, we will compare enrollment rates between treatment and comparison communities at endline. The basic regression model we will use to estimate the causal impact of the program can be described by: 𝐸𝐸𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 𝛽𝛽0 + 𝛽𝛽1𝐷𝐷𝑐𝑐 + 𝛽𝛽2𝑆𝑆𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 + 𝑢𝑢𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 (1) where Eci is a binary variable that is 1 if learner i from community c is enrolled in school at endline and 0 if not; Dc is a binary variable indicating treatment status of community c; Sci is the standard that learner i is attending at baseline; uci is an error term; and 𝛽𝛽0, 𝛽𝛽1, and 𝛽𝛽2 are parameters to be estimated. The coefficient of interest is 𝛽𝛽1, which measures the effect of the school construction on enrollment at endline. The same model will be used to evaluate the impact of the program on other indicators. This model will, in principle, include all learners in the baseline roster in treatment and comparison groups, and will adapt to include the relevant subgroups depending on the indicator analyzed. For example, when estimating the impact of school construction on transition to secondary school, we will not include learners attending standard 5 at baseline because, in the best case, they would be attending standard 8 at endline. We expect to be able to identify each of the learners in the rosters as girls or boys, and therefore it will be possible to conduct the same analysis by sex. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 81 For a sample of learners, we will also have additional information that includes their socio￾demographic characteristics and their household information. For them, the equation (1) can include that information and therefore changes to: 𝐸𝐸𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 𝛽𝛽0 + 𝛽𝛽1𝐷𝐷𝑐𝑐 + 𝑋𝑋𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ′ 𝛽𝛽2 + 𝑢𝑢𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 (2) where Xci is a vector of characteristics of learner i, such as age, sex, standard level at baseline, and household level characteristics such as assets. Again, the coefficient of interest is 𝛽𝛽1, which measures the effect of the school construction on enrollment at endline. This model therefore will include all learners in the sample, in treatment and comparison groups, and will control for their characteristics. Alternatively, a matching approach can be used. In addition to estimating the overall impact of the construction of secondary schools, we will also carry out a sub-group analysis to examine whether the impacts were different for sub￾groups of interest, such as girls or poorer households. We can estimate similar models to measure the effect on other outcomes of interest, such as dropout rates, transition to secondary school rates, repetition rates, etc. It will be possible to estimate the effect on outcomes such as enrollment for each year, and to understand how the trends in treatment and comparison schools have evolved. Finally, it is also possible to use other analytical approaches such as survival analysis to estimate the effect of the school construction on the outcomes of interest. Survival analysis measures the time between the beginning of observation until the occurrence of an event. In the present case, the event could be dropping out of school, for example. NORC will evaluate the possibility of using this approach to analyze and communicate the findings. Question 2: (2a) What effect does embedding a new CDSS in a community have on the attitudes and expectations of girls, boys, parents and communities in the areas served by the new AMAA constructed new schools regarding: ■ Primary school retention and completion and transition to secondary schools; ■ Interest in continuing girls’ and boys’ education and/or vocational training; ■ Marriage and pregnancy; and ■ Future work/employment/career? To answer this question, we will collect information from learners, parents and community leaders about their attitudes towards gender norms and girls’ education, as well as their expectations regarding future education, work and employment, marriage, and family. Attitudes. To estimate the effects of secondary school construction on attitudes, the NORC team proposes to collect data on opinions at baseline from learners attending standard 5 to standard 8 and their parents, in treatment and comparison communities. The exact same data PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 82 collection will take place again at endline, returning to students attending standard 5 to standard 8 and their parents. These cross-section’ data will allow the use of a quasi￾experimental designed to measure the impact of the secondary school construction activity on attitudes. We will estimate before-and-after changes in attitudes in communities that receive secondary schools and in communities that do not. The comparison of those changes is commonly known as the difference-in-difference (DiD) approach. The idea behind the DiD method is to eliminate the differences that the treatment and comparison groups may have (if any) and that are constant overtime. The methodology assumes that in the absence of the program, the two groups would display the same trends in attitudes.30 We will compare attitudes towards gender norms and girls’ education, among cross sections of learners (or parents) and estimate the causal impact of the school construction activity using regression models of the following form: 𝐴𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 𝛽𝛽0 + 𝛽𝛽1(𝐷𝐷𝑐𝑐 ∗ 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇) + 𝛽𝛽2𝐷𝐷𝑐𝑐 + 𝛽𝛽3𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 + 𝑋𝑋𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ′ 𝛽𝛽4 + 𝑢𝑢𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 (3) where Acit is the attitude for student i in community c, at time t, Dc is a binary variable indicating treatment status of community c; Time is a dummy variable equal to 1 at endline and 0 otherwise; Xci is a vector of characteristics of learner i, such as age, sex, standard level at baseline, and household level characteristics; ucit is an error term and 𝛽𝛽0, 𝛽𝛽1, 𝛽𝛽2 , 𝛽𝛽3, and the vector 𝛽𝛽4 are parameters to be estimated. The difference-in-difference estimator is 𝛽𝛽1, which measures the effect of the school construction on attitudes towards education, marriage and pregnancy, employment, etc. In addition, we will also conduct interviews with community leaders to collect information about their attitudes toward gender norms and girls’ education. The small number of interviews (12) will preclude us from an impact analysis; however, the information can be used to complete the understanding of the context. Expectations. Measuring the effect of the AMAA school construction on expectations only makes sense if we can measure expectations before the treatment group knows that a secondary school will be built in their community. Once it is known that a secondary school will be built, learners and parents would tend to adjust their expectations to the new reality that they will face, and this will tend to resemble expectations at endline in the treatment communities. The construction of schools in the district of Machinga is already taking place. Therefore, we will not try to measure the effect on expectations in that region. If the information about where school construction will take place in the Balaka district is still not public at the time of the baseline, we will measure changes in expectations there. We propose to collect data on expectations at baseline and endline from learners in standard 5 to standard 8 and their parents in the Balaka district and compute the DiD. 30 This assumption can be checked using some of a learner’s background data collected to respond to evaluation question 1 (e.g., information about their older siblings). PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 83 However, if the information about school construction is already public in Balaka at the time of the baseline, we will use a qualitative approach to try to explore if and how expectations might have changed. In that case, we will collect information in Focus Groups Discussions (FGDs) with girl and boy learners, and parents. If quantitative data is collected to measure expectations, we will run an equivalent regression model to the one used for attitudes. In this case, the dependent variable is an indicator related to expectations, rather than attitudes. 𝐸𝐸𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 𝛽𝛽0 + 𝛽𝛽1(𝐷𝐷𝑐𝑐 ∗ 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇) + 𝛽𝛽2𝐷𝐷𝑐𝑐 + 𝛽𝛽3𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 + 𝑋𝑋𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ′ 𝛽𝛽4 + 𝑢𝑢𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 (4) where Ecit is the expectation for student i in community c, at time t; Dc is a binary variable indicating treatment status of community c; Time is a dummy variable equal to 1 at endline and 0 otherwise; Xci is a vector of characteristics of learner i, such as age, sex, standard level at baseline, and household level characteristics; ucit is an error term and 𝛽𝛽0, 𝛽𝛽1, 𝛽𝛽2 , 𝛽𝛽3, and the vector 𝛽𝛽4 are parameters to be estimated. The difference-in-difference estimator is 𝛽𝛽1 which measures the effect of the school construction on attitudes towards education, marriage and pregnancy, employment, etc. It should be noted that the number of treatment and comparison communities in Balaka is small (13 in total) and, unless the changes in expectations are large, the estimates will tend to be imprecise. If this is the case, it will be noted and findings will not be taken as conclusive but rather suggestive of a particular trend. If instead we use qualitative data to learn about changes in expectations, we will use inductive thematic analysis to identify key subjects and recurring items or ideas emerging from FGDs with learners and parents. The emerged themes will be organized and preliminarily coded. Then, an iterative process will take place to identify the most common concepts and categories. (2b) What are the attitudes and expectations of (1) girls and boys who have dropped out of school; and (2) girls and boys who are in the new CDSSs regarding: ■ Perceived value of attending school and education as experienced thus-far; ■ Future education; ■ Marriage and pregnancy; and ■ Future work/employment/career? To answer part b of the question, we will again collect information from learners, parents and community leaders on attitudes and expectations from all the learners at baseline. Over time, we will update these opinions and aspirations of learners during new interviews. We will track all the learners included in the baseline sample over time. Each time a learner included in the baseline sample drops out of school, an interview will be triggered. Among other questions, we will include an update on their opinions and expectations. Dropouts will be again interviewed at endline. In the case of learners that stay in school, we will collect new information at endline. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 84 These data will allow us to see how learners’ attitudes and expectations change over time and to compare girls and boys that dropped out of school vs. those still attending secondary schools. The analysis will be descriptive and will not attempt to make any causal claim related to AMAA secondary schools. Questions 3 and 4: (3) What are the reasons for girls and boys to: (1) drop out of school; (2) repeat; and (3) be held back? (4) How are the CDSSs helping girls to overcome identified barriers, such as: education costs, early pregnancy, early marriage, lack of WASH facilities, distance to secondary school, and lack of space in secondary schools? Are there additional barriers to accessing schools faced by girls? Question 3 looks to identify the reasons girls and boys drop out of school, repeat levels, or are held back.31 We will focus also on risk factors and aspects that girls and parents describe as protecting girls’ capacities to attend school, persist from one grade to the next, and complete primary or secondary school. The goal of question 4 is to understand whether constructed secondary schools helps girls to overcome barriers like education costs, early pregnancy, early marriage, lack of WASH facilities, distance to secondary school, and lack of space in secondary schools. As in the case of question 2b, we will address this question by conducting interviews each time that one of the learners included in the sample created at baseline is found to have dropped out of school, repeats the standard, or is held back. In the cases of dropouts, a visit to the learner household would be necessary to find out the reasons behind the decision of leaving school and the current circumstances of the learner (e.g., marital status, activity, location, etc.). We will aim to document the main reason for dropping out and the surrounding circumstances, the current situation of the learner, and future plans. At endline, we will try to find these boys and girls, and ask again about their situation regarding education (e.g., if they went back to school), work and employment, marital status, children, and plans for the future. In cases of repetition or when the student is held back, we will request information from the teacher involved in the decision. These learners will continue to be followed over time until endline. We will compile and analyze these data at endline and compare between the treatment and comparison communities to study if there are differences in the reasons students drop out and to identify the main barriers girls face in attending secondary education. We will organize the data by reason for dropping out and we will also explore if there are differences in those reasons between boys and girls, and between the group of poorer learners and the rest. 31 By “held back,” we mean keeping the learners in standard 7, rather than promoting them to standard 8, in order to better prepare them for the final year of primary school and the certification test that takes place after completing the primary education level. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 85 In addition, in the case of treatment communties, we will organize FGDs with girls and parents to discuss the advantages of having access to the new AMAA secondary school and also the oportunities for and challenges of staying (keeping learners) in schools. The data will be transcribed verbatim and an inductive thematic approach to analyize it will be followed to identify the main problems that can keep learners from attending school and the main advantages of having a secondary school close to their homes. The qualitative data will be coded and used to complement the quantitative data and gain depth in understanding. Question 5: (5a) What effect do the new CDSSs have on the perceptions of learners regarding physical and socio￾emotional aspects of safety? To address the question, we will compare perceptions of safety between those attending secondary schools in their communities vs. those that attend a secondary school away from their community and need to travel or to relocate to other communities to access secondary education. We will compare secondary students in treatment communities with secondary students in comparison communities as we believe that the proximity to the school could reduce exposure to emotional, physical, and sexual violence. (5b) What are the perceptions of girls and boys dropping out of school regarding physical and socio-emotional aspects of safety? For girls and boys who drop out of school, our approach to questions 3 and 4 partly answers this question since our interviews with this group will include questions of safety. We will also research how AMAA new secondary schools affect barriers such as distance to school. To learn more about the safety perceptions of dropouts, we will collect information during interviews triggered each time one of the learners in the baseline sample is found to have dropped out of school. In addition, at endline, we will revisit and re-interview dropouts and ask questions about safety from their counterparts who are still attending school. NORC will present a descriptive analysis of all these data about safety, making use of all the demographic and background data collected on these girls and boys at baseline. Question 6: What experience do new CDSSs have on attracting and retaining teachers? This question aims to document the experience that the new AMAA secondary schools have attracting and retaining teachers. NORC proposes to use administrative school data and teachers’ and head teachers’ interviews to construct longitudinal data on all new AMAA secondary school teachers. A descriptive analysis will be produced using that data. We will capture teachers’ basic demographic and education characteristics and document school vacancies. Over time, we will complete the information by adding data on teacher turnover and replacements, seniority, working conditions, and job satisfaction, etc. Teacher interviews will also include questions to document the main positive and negative aspects of PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 86 teachers’ experiences in the new schools. Findings from research question 7, which relate to the satisfaction with the school building, will also be included. We will create the baseline for the teacher panel in the second visit to treatment communities (currently expected to take place in March 2019) when all secondary schools are supposed to be finished and running. The information will be updated annually in 2020 and 2021 during the same visits when we will update the panel of learners. Obviously, in this case, the data collection will only take place in treatment communities. It should be noted that the proposed approach consists of documenting and trying to understand the experiences of teachers in the rural locations where they will be deployed. We will not try to compare their retention or turnover rates with those of teachers in other schools. Question 7: Are girls, their parents/guardians, and community members satisfied with the construction design and facilities of the new schools? The construction design attributes should be further specified in collaboration with USAID. This question seeks to understand learners’, parents’, and community leaders’ satisfaction with the new AMAA secondary school buildings. The AMAA buildings follow the Malawi MoEST standards, therefore the aim is not to inquire about AMAA schools as a distinctive group but generally about the regular schools offered by the public sector. We will interview a random sample of AMAA secondary school learners, parents, and teachers at endline in 2021. During these interviews, we will inquire about their satisfaction with the building structure, including classrooms, assembly hall, laboratory, library, fences and gates, latrines, outdoor space, and water sources, etc. The analysis of the information will be descriptive, but we will use the findings from other questions, such as reasons for dropping out of school or discussions related to question 4, to complement it. In Annex II, we provide an evaluation matrix showing the relationship between the evaluation questions and methods. More detail on the research and evaluation design can be found in the evaluation design report (EDR). APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 87 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 SAMPLING STRATEGY AND SELECTION OF RESPONDENTS As with any quantitative analysis based on survey data, the required sample size is determined by a mathematical calculation that depends on a number of factors. These include features of the study design, properties of the data and outcome variables, etc. In our case, the main paramenter was the number of treatment communities that is given by the number of schools that are being built. We calculated the minimum effect that will be possible to detect with 11 treatment communities, making the following assumptions: At baseline, we created a sample of learners attending standard 5, 6, 7, and 8 in each of the treatment and comparison communities. We randomly selected 20 of the enrolled learners from each standard. The sample included 10 girls and 10 boys whenever possible. ■ α is the significance level of the test, or probability of Type I error. We use the standard value of 0.05. ■ β is the power of test, where (1-β) is the probability of Type II error. We use the standard value of 0.8. ■ ρ is the intracluster correlation coefficient, or ICC. The ICC in the present case is a measure of how much variability lies between schools and how much lies within schools. We assume an ICC of 0.1. ■ r 2 is the proportion of the variation in the outcome due to the covariates anticipated in the regression analysis. In our case, these covariates will include a range of household and individual characteristics. For this parameter, we assume an approximate value of 0.3 ■ Attrition is assumed to be 20% at endline. ■ The number of treatment and control communities is identical: 11 in each group; ■ A random sample of 80 students per community (20 per standard). Under those assupmtions, we calculated the minimum detectable effect size (MDES). The MDES is the smallest impact of the activity on the outcome variable that the evaluation will be able to detect. We estimated that we will be able to detect a change in transition to secondary school from 30% to 50% when we do the analysis for each standard separately, and from 30% to 47% when we analyze standard 6 to 8 altogether. In addition, we will be able to detect changes from 50% to 70% in completion of primary school when analyzing standards separately, and from 50% to 65% when analyzing all standards together. Summarizing, the sample includes 22 schools (includes treatment and comparison) with 80 learners in each school, for a total sample of 1,760 learners. In addition, we created a sample of the learners’ parents/caregivers to interview. We estimated that around 25-35 parents will PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 88 actually respond our interview. We also interviewed the community leaders to learn about their attitudes and expectations. 32 The teacher and head teacher information will be censual and therefore will include all AMAA new secondary school teachers and head teachers. We will also collect qualitative data during focus group discussions. In March 2020, we will randomly select four treatment communities and conduct 2 FGDs with girl learners and 2 FGDs with parents in each of them. Girl learners and parents will be selected randomly from all those eligible. 33 Finally, in March 2021 we will interview a random sample of learners in form 1 to form 3 attending the new AMAA secondary schools and their parents. The sample will include 30 learners per school, 10 in each form (half of them girls whenever possible), for a total of 300 learners. We will also invite 30 parents to respond to the school building satisfaction survey. These samples assume a confidence level of 95% and a margin of error of 5%. LIMITATIONS The evaluation team has identified some limitations inherent to the design of this evaluation. We list some of the more relevant limitations below: Representativeness of the Sample. The sample is representative of the areas where AMAA school construction will take place, in the areas of Machinga and Balaka districts. Therefore, results are not directly generalizable at the national level, other geographical areas, or to other school levels. Despite this, we hope the study will be informative and contribute to the evidence regarding secondary school construction, secondary school attendance, and dropouts in developing countries. Longitudinal Attrition and Absenteeism. The evaluation employs a longitudinal design where we will interview the same learners and teachers at baseline, follow-ups, and endline. Some learners will be still attending school, while some other will drop out. Absenteeism rates are, however, high and could present a problem. For dropouts, we plan to visit them at home. All measures available to keep track of learners are in place to reduce attrition. School Sample Size. It should be noted that the nature of the activity necessarily limits our sample size. The number of treatment and comparison communities in Balaka is small (13 in total) and unless the changes are large, estimates will tend to be imprecise. If this is the case, it will be noted and findings will not be taken as conclusive but rather suggestive of a particular trend. In general, however, we expect the sample to be large enough to estimate the expected effects. 32 According to a review conducted by Guest et al (2017) 12 interviews are enough to discover between 80 and 90 percent of the themes. 33 Previous research shows that conducting six FGD (by subpopulation of interest) allows discovering between 80 and 90 percent of the themes (Guest et al, 2017). PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 89 ANNEX III: DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS AND IRB MATERIALS LEARNER INSTRUMENT BASELINE - MAY 2018 FIELD CONTROL [PROGRAMMER: Capture the date, the start time and the end time of the interview, as well as the GPS location] Par_consent: Signed parental/caregiver consent (only for interviewers) • Yes • No [PROG: GO TO END_TEXT] District Name of School School EMIS number Name of Learner Sex Boy Girl Standard and class Standard Class Main teacher’s name Date of Assessment Day Month Year 2018 ID/Name of evaluator April 2018 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 90 Learner Assent Chilolezo cha ophunzira Hello, we are working with Investment in Knowledge and NORC, a research organization, and we want to learn about students like you in this area of Malawi. Zikomo, tikugwira ntchito ndi Invest in Knowledge ndi NORC. Bungwe la kafukufuku, ndipo tikufuna tiphunzire zokhudza ophunzira ngati iweyo mu dera lino la Malawi. Today, I would like to ask you some questions that will help us to understand students in Malawi. You were picked by chance, like in a raffle or lottery. Lero, ndikufuna ndikufunse mafunso amene atithandize kumvetsa za ana asukulu kuno ku Malawi .. Unasankhidwa mwamwayi, ngati mwa wachiwona ndani. This survey is voluntary. It is completely your choice to answer the questions and if you don’t want to participate, it is fine and nothing will happen to you. Kafukufukuyu ngongodzipereka. Chisankho chonse chili mmanja mwako kuyankha mafunso, ndipo ngati sukufuna kutenga nawo mbali, zabwinobwino ndipo palibe chilichonse chikuchitikire iweyo. If you agree to answer the questions, all your answers will be strictly confidential and we will not share them with anyone. I will NOT show your answers to your teacher, friends or anyone. Your identity will always be kept confidential and your name will never be used. Ngati uvomere kuyankha mafunso, mayankho ako onse adzakhala a chinsinsi ndipo sitidzanena kwa wina aliyense. Sindionetsa mayankh ako kwa aphunzitsi, anzako kapena wina aliyense. Za iwe zones zizasungidwa mwachinsinsi nthawizonse ndipo dzina lako siloizagwiritsidwa ntchito. This is NOT a test and it will NOT affect your grade/standing at school. Awa si mayeso ndipo sidzikhudzana ndi malikisi kapena kakhonzedwe kako pasukulu. If any of the questions make you uncomfortable, we can skip them. You can also choose to stop answering questions at any time. Ngati usowe mtendere ndi funso lirilonse, titha kulidumpha. Ndiponso utha kusankha kusiya kuyankha mafunso nthawi yiliyonse. Do you want to answer the questions today? Kodi ukufuna kuyankha mafunso lero? • Yes • No [Go to END_TEXT] PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 91 Now, we are going to ask you some questions so we can learn more about you. Tsopano tikufunsani mafunso ena pofuna kuphunzira zambiri za iwe SEX Observe: (unless not clear, then ask) 0. Girl 1. Boy AGE How old are you? Uli ndi zaka zingati? _ _ years • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) GRD In what standard are you currently? Padakali pano uki kalasi yanji? • Standard 5 • Standard 6 • Standard 7 • Standard 8 • Don’t know (-98) PROG: GO TO END_TEXT • Refused (-99) PROG: GO TO END_TEXT PRVGRD In which standard where you enrolled last year? Kodi chaka chatha unali kalasi yanji? • Standard 4 • Standard 5 • Standard 6 • Standard 7 • Standard 8 • Refused (-99) TRAVEL Generally, how do you travel to school? MARK ALL THAT APPLY Kodi umayenda pachani popita kusukulu? • By foot (1) Pansi • By bicycle (2) Pa njinga yakapalasa • By motorcycle (3) Pa njinga ya moto • By car (4) Pa galimoto • By public transportation (eg.Kabaza (of either bicycle or motorcycle), taxi, bus) (5) pa thirasipoti zolipira • Other, specify______(96) zina TRAVELWITH Generally, do you travel to school… MARK ALL THAT APPLY PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 92 Kodi umayenda ….. popita kusukulu? • … alone (1) Wekha • … with an adult (2) ndi munthu wa mkulu • …with older children (3) ndi ana anzako okulirapo? • …with children of your age or younger (4) ana koma ochepreko msinkhu kapena ofanana nawo msinkhu • …other, specify ________(96) Zina TIME How long does it take you to travel from home to school, in minutes? Zimakutengera nthawi yayitali bwanji kuyenda kuchokera kunyumba kukafika ku sukulu? _____ minutes [PROG: min 0; max 200] mphindi LANG What is the primary language that you speak at home? Kodi kukhomo kwanu mumalankhulara chilankhulo chiti pafupipafupi? 1. Chichewa 2. Chiyao 3. Chinyanja 4. Chinsena 5. Chilomwe 6. Chitumbuka 7. English 8. Other ETHNIC What do you consider to be your ethnic group or community? [PROG: Select all that apply] Kodi umazitchula kuti ndiwe wa mtundu wanji ? (Select all that applies) 1. Chewa 2. Lomwe 3. Yao 4. Ngoni 5. Tumbuka 6. Nyanja 7. Sena 8. Tonga 9. Ngonde 10. Other 11. Don’t know (-98) 12. Refused (-99) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 93 EAT Did you eat anything today? Kodi unadya chili chonse lero? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) MAXSCH How far in school do you expect to go? Kodi ukuyembekezera kuti sukulu uzapita nayo patali bwanji? 1. Finish Standard 5 2. Finish Standard 6 3. Finish Standard 7 4. Finish Standard 8 5. Finish Form 1 6. Finish Form 2 7. Finish Form 3 8. Finish Form 4 9. Some vocational or technical school after secondary school 10. Finish vocational or technical school after secondary school 11. Some college or university 12. Finish college or university 13. Don’t know (-98) 14. Refused (-99) NOPRIM Why won’t you complete primary school? [PROG: If MAXSCH is less than 4] [ENUMERATOR: Probe: Are there any other reasons?] [PROG: Select all that apply]. Ndi chifukwa chiyani suzamaliza ma phuniziro ako a pulayimale? • I am not interested in school (1) • I will be helping at home /home farm/ family business (2) • I will be learning a trade (3) • I will be working for pay (4) • It is unsafe for me to walk to school (5) • I am concerned with safety at school (6) • School is too far from my home (7) • School costs too much (e.g. books, uniforms, school supplies, transport, fees) (8) • I am not doing well in school (9) • Members of my household do not want me to attend school (10) • Other, specify____________________________(96) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) NOSEC Why won’t you complete secondary school? [PROG: If MAXCHL is 4 5 6 or 7] [ENUMERATOR: Probe: Are there any other reasons?] [PROG: Select all that apply]. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 94 Ndi chifukwa chiyani suzamaliza ma phuniziro ako a sekondale? • I am not interested in school (1) • I will be helping at home/ home farm/ family business (2) • I will be learning a trade (3) • I will be working for pay (4) • It is unsafe for me to walk to school (5) • I am concerned with safety at school (6) • School is too far from my home (7) • School costs too much (e.g. books, uniforms, school supplies, transport, fees) (8) • Members of my household do not want me to attend school (9) • Other, specify____________________________(96) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) MISSSCHL How many days did you miss school last week? Kodi musabata yatha unajomba kusukulu masiku angati? _________Days [PROG: Min is 0; Max is 5] • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) MISSREASON What was the main reason you missed school last week? [PROG: If MISSCHHL is greater than 0] Kodi chifukwa chachikulu chomwe unajombera kusukulu chinali chiyani? • I was sick (1) • I had housework (2) • I had farmwork/work to do (3) • I had to take care of a child or sick relative (4) • I had to go to work for money (5) • I was too tired (6) • I had plans with friends (7) • I did not want to go to school (8) • I was menstruating (9) • I had outstanding school-related costs (10) • Other, specify____________________________ (96) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 95 SEE Do you have difficulty seeing? If you wear glasses, do you have difficulty seeing when you have the glasses on? Kodi uli ndi vuto la maso? Ukavara magalasi umakhalabe ndi vuto lakuowna? • No - no difficulty (1) • Yes – some difficulty (2) • Yes – a lot of difficulty (3) • Cannot do at all (4) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) HEAR Do you have difficulty hearing? If you use a hearing aid, do you have difficulty hearing when using the hearing aid? Kodi uli ndi vuto lakumva? Ukavara zothandizira kumva, kodi umakhalabe ndi vuto lakumva? • No - no difficulty (1) • Yes – some difficulty (2) • Yes – a lot of difficulty (3) • Cannot do at all (4) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) WALK Do you have difficulty getting around, such as walking or climbing steps? Kodi uli ndi vuto lakuyenda kapena kukwera ma sitepe? • No - no difficulty (1) • Yes – some difficulty (2) • Yes – a lot of difficulty (3) • Cannot do at all (4) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) THINK Do you have difficulty thinking, such as remembering or concentrating? Kodi uli ndi vuto loganiza monga kukumbukira zinthu kapena kumvetsetsa zinthu? • No - no difficulty (1) • Yes – some difficulty (2) • Yes – a lot of difficulty (3) • Cannot do at all (4) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 96 WASH Do you have difficulty taking care of yourself, for example washing all over or dressing yourself? Kodi uli ndi vuto lozisamlira wekha monga kuzisambitsa kapena kuziveka wekha? • No - no difficulty (1) • Yes – some difficulty (2) • Yes – a lot of difficulty (3) • Cannot do at all (4) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SPEAK Do you have difficulty communicating, for example understanding or being understood when you speak [prim_lang]? Kodi uli ndi vuto kuti umvetsetse chinthu chomwe chanendwa kapena kuti anthu avetse chomwe ukunena? • No - no difficulty (1) • Yes – some difficulty (2) • Yes – a lot of difficulty (3) • Cannot do at all (4) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) RATE Academically, what type of student are you…. Ungadziyike pa nambala yanji kumaphunziro… ….an excellent student? / Wophunzira wochita bwinono zedi? …a very good student? / Wophunzira wochita bwino kwambiri? …a good student? / Wophunzira wochita bwino? …a not so good student? / Wophunzira wochita bwino kweni kweni? Don’t know (-98) Refused (-99) Now, I would like to ask you some questions about the people who live with you. Pano ndikufuna ndi kufunse mafunso a wanthu omwe umakhala nawo LIVE_MOTHER Do you live with your biological mother? Kodi umakhala ndi mayi ako okubereka? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Refused (-99) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 97 READ_MOTHER Does your mother know how to write and read ? [PROG: If 20=Yes] Kodi amayi akowa amatha kulemba ndi kuwerenga? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) EDU_MOTHER What is the highest level of education that your mother completed? [PROG: If LIVE_MOTHER=Yes] Amayi ako sukulu analekezera kalasi yanji? • No schooling (1) • Some primary (2) • Complete primary (3) • Some secondary (4) • Complete secondary (5) • Higher than secondary (6) • Other, specify_______________________________(96) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) LIVE_FATHER Do you live with your father? Kodi umakhala ndi bamboo ako okubereka? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Refused (-99) READ_FATHER Does your father know how to write and read? [PROG: If LIVE_FATHER=Yes] Kodi abambo akowa amatha kulemba ndi kuwerenga? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 98 EDU_FATHER What is the highest level of education that your father completed? [PROG: If 23=Yes] Kodi abambo ako sukulu adalekezera kalasi yanji? • No schooling (1) • Some primary (2) • Complete primary (3) • Some secondary (4) • Complete secondary (5) • Higher than secondary (6) • Other, specify_______________________________(96) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) GUARDIAN Who is your guardian? Your guardian is the adult who takes care of you the most. [PROG: If LIVE_MOTHER=No AND LIVE_FATHER=No] Kodi amakuyang’anira iwe ndi ndani? Uyu ndi munthu yemwe amakuyang’anira nthawi zambiri. • Step-mother (8) • Step-father (9) • Grandmother (1) • Grandfather (2) • Aunt (3) • Uncle (4) • Sister (5) • Brother (6) • Cousin (7) • Neighbor (10) • Other, specify ________(96) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) READ_GUARDIAN Does your guardian know how to write and read? [PROG: If LIVE_MOTHER=No AND LIVE_FATHER=No] Kodi okuyanganirawa amatha kulemba ndi kuwerenga? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 99 EDU_GUARDIAN What is the highest level of education that your guardian completed? [PROG: If LIVE_MOTHER=No AND LIVE_FATHER=No] Kodi okuyang’anirawa sukulu adalekezera kalasi yanji? • No schooling (1) • Some primary (2) • Complete primary (3) • Some secondary (4) • Complete secondary (5) • Higher than secondary (6) • Other, specify_______________________________(96) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIBS Do you have older siblings? Kodi uli ndi azimbale ako obadwa nawo bele limodzi omwe ali aakulu kwa iwe? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) NUM_SIBS How many older siblings do you have? [PROG: If SIBS=Yes] Uli ndi azibale ako angati obadwa nawo bele limodzi omwe ali akulu kwa iwe? • One (1) • Two (2) • Three (3) • Four (4) • Five (5) • More than five (6) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) I would like to ask you a few simple questions about your older sibling/s [[PROG: If SIBS=Yes] Uli ndi azibale ako angati obadwa nawo bele limodzi omwe ali akulu kwa iwe? PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 100 SIB_1 Think about your oldest sibling, is a brother or a sister? Taganizira yemwe unabadwa naye bele limodzi yemwe ali wa mkulu kwa nonse. Kodi ndi mchimwene kapena mchemwali? • Brother (1) • Sister (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIB_1_AGE How old is he/she? Ali ndi zaka zingati? _________years old • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIB_1_STUD Is he/she a student (any level, primary, secondary, vocational, university, etc.)? Kodi padakali pano ali pa sukulu? • Yes (1) • No (2) [PROG: Skip to SIB_1_MAXSCHL] • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIB_1_STUD_LVL If yes, what level is he/she attending? [PROG: If SIB_1_STUD=Yes] Ngati eya ali kalasi yanji ya sukulu? 1. Less than Standard 5 2. Standard 5 3. Standard 6 4. Standard 7 5. Standard 8 6. Form 1 7. Form 2 8. Form 3 9. Finish Form 4 10. Vocational or technical school after secondary school 11. Finish vocational or technical school after secondary school 12. College or university 13. Other. 13.a. Specify__________________ PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 101 SIB_1_MAXSCHL If no, what was the highest level of education that he/she completed? [PROG: If SIB_1_STUD=NO or Don’t know] Ngati ayi, kodi sukulu adalekezera kalasi yanji yomwe adakhonza? • Less than Standard 5 • Standard 5 • Standard 6 • Standard 7 • Standard 8 • Form 1 • Form 2 • Form 3 • Finish Form 4 • Vocational or technical school after secondary school • Finish vocational or technical school after secondary school • College or university • Other. 13.a. Specify__________________ • Don’t know but less than Primary complete • Don’t know but more than Primary and less than Secondary complete • Don’t know but more than Secondary complete • Don’t know and has no idea SIB_1_MARR Is he/she married? Kodi ali pa banja? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIB_1_CHLD Does he/she have children? Kodi ali ndi ana? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 102 SIB_2_SEX Think about your next oldest sibling, is a brother or a sister? [PROG: If NUM_SIBS>2 & <7] Pano taganizira yemwe anapondana ndi yemwe tamalizira kukambayu, kodi ndi mnyamata kapena mtsikana? • Brother (1) • Sister (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIB_2_AGE How old is he/she? Ali ndi zaka zingati? _________years old • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIB_2_STUD Is he/she a student (any level, primary, secondary, vocational, university, etc.)? Kodi ali pa Sukulu? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIB_2_STUD_LVL If yes, what level is he/she attending? [PROG: If SIB_2_STUD=Yes] Ngati eya ali kalasi yanji ya sukulu? • Less than Standard 5 • Standard 5 • Standard 6 • Standard 7 • Standard 8 • Form 1 • Form 2 • Form 3 • Finish Form 4 • Vocational or technical school after secondary school • Finish vocational or technical school after secondary school • College or university • Other. 13.a. Specify__________________ PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 103 SIB_2_MAXSCHL If no, what level is the highest level of education that he/she completed? [PROG: If SIB_2_STUD=NO or Don’t know] Ngati ayi, kodi sukulu adalekezera kalasi yanji? • Less than Standard 5 • Standard 5 • Standard 6 • Standard 7 • Standard 8 • Form 1 • Form 2 • Form 3 • Finish Form 4 • Vocational or technical school after secondary school • Finish vocational or technical school after secondary school • College or university • Other. 13.a. Specify__________________ • Don’t know but less than Primary complete • Don’t know but more than Primary and less than Secondary complete • Don’t know but more than Secondary complete • Don’t know and has no idea SIB_2_MARR Is he/she married? Kodi ali pa banja? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIB_2_CHLD Does he/she have children? Kodi ali ndi ana? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 104 SIB_3_SEX Finally, think about your next oldest sibling, is a brother or a sister? [PROG: If NUM_SIBS >3 & <7] Pano taganizira yemwe anapondana ndi yemwe tamalizira kukambayu, kodi ndi mnyamata kapena mtsikana? • Brother (1) • Sister (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIB_3_AGE How old is he/she? Ali ndi zaka zingati _________years old • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIB_3_STUD Is he/she a student (any level, primary, secondary, vocational, university, etc.)? Kodi ali pasukulu? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIB_3_STUD_LVL If yes, what level is he/she attending? [PROG: If SIB_3_STUD=Yes] Ngati eya ali kalasi yanji ya sukulu? • Less than Standard 5 • Standard 5 • Standard 6 • Standard 7 • Standard 8 • Form 1 • Form 2 • Form 3 • Finish Form 4 • Vocational or technical school after secondary school • Finish vocational or technical school after secondary school • College or university • Other. 13.a. Specify__________________ PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 105 SIB_3_MAXSCHL If no, what level is the highest level of education that he/she completed? [PROG: If SIB_3_STUD=NO or Don’t know] Ngati ayi, kodi sukulu adalekezera kalasi yanji? • Less than Standard 5 • Standard 5 • Standard 6 • Standard 7 • Standard 8 • Form 1 • Form 2 • Form 3 • Finish Form 4 • Vocational or technical school after secondary school • Finish vocational or technical school after secondary school • College or university • Other. 13.a. Specify__________________ • Don’t know but less than Primary complete • Don’t know but more than Primary and less than Secondary complete • Don’t know but more than Secondary complete • Don’t know and has no idea SIB_3_MARR Is he/she married? Kodi ali pa banja? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SIB_3_CHLD Does he/she have children? Kodi ali ndi ana? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 106 The next questions are about things in your house. Mafunso otsatira ndi akatundu yemwe muli naye pakhomo panu Does your household have… Kodi kunyumba kwanu muli ndi Q Yes (1) No (2) Don’t know (-98) No response (-99) CHAIR a chair in good condition? Mpando wogwira ntchito wabwinobwino? BED a bed in good condition? Kama/bedi logwira ntchito wabwinobwino? CLOCK a clock in good working condition? Watchi yogwira ntchito wabwinobwino? RADIO a radio in good working condition? Wayalesi yomvera yogwira ntchito wabwinobwino? TELEVISION a television in good working condition? Wayalesi yakanema yogwira ntchito wabwinobwino? COMPUTER a computer in good working condition? Kopyuta yogwira ntchito wabwinobwino? BIKE a bicycle in good working condition? Njinga yakapalasa yogwira ntchito wabwinobwino? MOTOR a motorcycle in good working condition? Njinga ya moto yogwira ntchito wabwinobwino? CAR a car, truck, or boat with engine in good working condition? Galimoto thiraki kapena boti la injini logwira ntchito wabwinobwino? REFRI a refrigerator in good working condition? Filiji yogwira ntchito wabwinobwino? STOVE a stove in good working condition? (excluding firewood) Sitovu yogwira ntchito wabwinobwino (kupatula nkhuni)? PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 107 ELECTRICITY Does your household have electricity (any type: solar panels, grid, hydro)? Kodi nyumba yakwnau ili ndi magesi? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) PHONE Do you or someone in your household have a working cellphone? Kodi iwe kapena wina wapakhomo panu ali ndi telefoni ya m’manja yogwira ntchito? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) BOOKS Apart from schoolbooks, do you have any other books that you can read at home? Kupataula ma buku asukulu, kodi muli ndi ma buku ena oti mungamawerenge kunyumba? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) SCHLSHIP Do you have any type of scholarship to help with school fees or other school related expenditures? Kodi uli ndi thandizo lilironse loti likuthandize ndi kulipira sukulu kapena zinthu zina ndi zina zofunika kusukulu? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) OPINIONS ABOUT GENDER NORMS: I am going to read a number of statements about how people think that girls, boys, men and women should behave. Please consider each statement carefully and decide which of the following options best describes your view: If I read out the statement you may answer 1 = Strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly agree, depending on you own view PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 108 Pano ndikuwerengera ziganizo zingapo za momwe anthu amaganizira kuti atsikana, anyamata, amuna ndi azimayi ayenera kukhalira. Ganizra ziganizo izi bwinobwino ndipo undiwuze kuti ndi ziti mwa izi zikuyimira momwe iwe umaziwonera zinthuzi. Untha kundiyanka kuti ukusutsana nazo kwambiri, ukusutsana nazo, uli pakatikati, ukugwirizana nazo, ukugwirizana nazo kwambiri. 1 = Strongly disagree (Kusutsana nazo kwambiri) 2 = Disagree (Kusutsana nazo) 3 = Neutral (Pakatikati) 4 = Agree (Kugwirizana nazo) 5 = Strongly agree (Kugwirizana nazo kwambiri). (Agree SHOWCARD) Ok, are you ready? Let’s start. Kodi wakonzeka? (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Gen1 Boys are usually more intelligent than girls. Nthawi zambiri anyamata ndi anzeru kuposa atsikana Gen2 Boys are naturally better at math and science than girls Mwachibadwa anyamata amachita bwino pa maphunziro a masamu ndi a sayansi kuposa atsikana Gen3 It is more important for boys to do well in school than it is for girls. Ndi chabwino kwambiri kuti anyamata azichita bwino mukalasi kusiyana ndi atsikana Gen4 Since girls have to get married, they should not be sent for higher education. Chifukwa atsikana ayenera kukwatiwa, sayenera kutumizidwa ku maphunziro apamwamba Gen5 Girls like it when boys tease and make fun of them. Atsikana amasangalara ngati anyamata akuwaselewula iwo? Gen6 Girls provoke boys by wearing short dresses. Atsikana amakopa anyamata povala ma diresi aafupi. Gen7 It is a girl’s fault if a teacher sexually harasses her. Ndi vuto lamtsikana ngati mphunzitsi aseweretsa thupi lake. Gen8 It is acceptable for a teacher to get a learner pregnant if he marries her. Ndizovomerezeka mphunzitsi kupereka mimba kwa mwana wasukulu ngati atamukwatire Gen9 It is unacceptable for a woman to disagree with her husband. Sizovomerezeka kuti mzimayi asutsane ndi mwamuna wake PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 109 Gen10 Men need more care as they work harder than women. Azibambo amfunika chisamaliro chambiri chifukwa magwira ntchito zamphamvu kusiyana ndi azimayi Gen11 Bathing and feeding the children are the mother’s responsibility. Kasambitsa ndi kudyetsa ana ndi ntchito ya azimayi Gen12 There are times when a man needs to beat his wife. Pali nthawi zina zoti mzibambo ayenera kumenya mkazi wake Gen13 A mother should tolerate violence from the father in order to keep the family together. Mayi ayenera kupirira nkhanza kuchokera kwa mwamuna wake kuti banja lisapasuke Gen14 A woman’s most important role is to take care of the family and cook Ntchito ya mzimayi yeni yeni ndi yosamala banja ndi ku phika Gen15 A woman should always obey her husband Mkazi ayenera kumvera mwamuna wake nthawi zones Gen16 A woman should have the right to divorce Mkazi ayenera kukhala ndi ufulu wothetsa banja. ASPIRATIONS AND EXPECTATIONS I am now going to ask you your opinion on various issues. There are no right and wrong answers. I just want to know what you think. Tsopano ndikufunsa za mmene umaganizira pa zinthu zosiyanasiyana. Palibe yankho lokhoza ndi lolakwa. Ndingofuna ndidziwe mmene ukuganizira. EXPSCHL Imagine you had no constraints and could study for as long as you liked. What is the highest level of formal education that you would like to complete? Taganiza kuti unalibe zolepheretsa ndipo ukanaphunzira mmene ukufunira. Kodi ukhoza kufuna utalekezera pati maphunziro? • Standard 5 • Standard 6 • Standard 7 • Standard 8 • Form 1 • Form 2 • Form 3 • Form 4 • Some Vocational or technical school after secondary school • Finish vocational or technical school after secondary school PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 110 • College or university • Other (specify)_____________________________ • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) EXREACH Think about your situation now. Do you think you will be able to reach that level of education? Ganiza za zomwe ukudutsamo pano. Ukuganiza kuti utha kufikira mlingo umenewo wa maphunziro? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) OLDEDU How old do you think you will be when you finish all of your education? Kodi ukuganiza kuti uzakhala ndi zaka zingati kuti uzamalize maphunziro ako? _________ years • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) JOB Think about yourself at age 25, would you like to have job or be working at that age? Uziganizire utafika zaka 25, utha kufuna utadzakhala pa ntchito kapena utamadzagwira ntchito pa msinkhu umenewo? • Yes (1) • No (2) [PROG: Skip to ACTIV] • Don’t know (-98) [PROG: Skip to ACTIV] • Refused (-99)[PROG: Skip to ACTIV] JOBTYPE What type of job or work would you like to do? Kodi ukufuna utamadzagwira ntchito yanji? (Do not prompt. Enter code from provided list) OTHER Specify _________ 01=Accountant 02=Actor/actress 03=Administrative Assistant/Secretary/Clerical 04=Artist 05=Civil servant 06=Computer operator 07=Construction worker 08=Cook 09=Dentist 11=Doctor/Physician PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 111 12=Domestic Worker 13=Driver/Conductor 14=Electrician 15=Engineer 16=Factory worker 16=Farmer 17=Firemean/Firewoman 18=Fisherman/woman 19=Fulltime parent/Housewife 20=Journalist 20=Labourer/Unskilled 21=Lawyer 22=Lecturer/Professor 23=Manager 23=Market Trader/shop assistant 24=Mason/Builder 25=Mechanic 26=Nurse 27=Painter/decorator 28=Pilot 29=Policeman/woman 30=Politician 31=President/leader of country 32=Religious leader/priest/imam/shaik/pastor 32=Security Guard 33=Scientist 34=Singer 35=Soldier 36=Sportsman/woman 37=Tailor/Seamstress 38=Taxi Driver 39=Teacher 40=Trader/businessman/woman 41=Veterinarian 42=Other -98=Don’t know -99=Refuse PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 112 EXJOB Given your current situation do you expect that you will be able to have that kind of job at 25? Kutengera za mmene ulili pano, kodi ukuyembekezera kuzakhala pa ntchito ngati imeneyo podzafika zaka 25? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) ACTIV If you don’t want to have a job or be working at 25, what would you like to do? Ngati sukufuna kudzakhala pa ntchito kapena kugwira ntchito pa zaka 25, kodi ukufuna kumadzatani? [PROG: Ask only if JOB=No] • Study • Take care of my household/children • Nothing • Volunteer • Travel • Other. Specify_______________ • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) MARR Would you like to get married at some point in your life? Kodi utha kufuna kudzakhala pa banja nthawi yina? • Yes (1) • No (2) [PROG: SKIP to EXCHILDEVER] • Don’t know (-98) ) [PROG: SKIP to EXCHILDEVER] • Refused (-99) ) [PROG: SKIP to EXCHILDEVER] AGEMARR At what approximate age would you like to get married? Kodi ukufuna utadzakwatiwa/tira ndi zaka zingati? _________ years • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) EXCHILDEVER Would you like to have children at some point in your life? Kodi ukufuna udzakhale ndi ana pa nthawi yina? • Yes (1) • No (2) [PROG: Skip to LAD1] • I already have a child of my own (3) [PROG: Skip to LAD1] • Don’t know (-98) [PROG: Skip to LAD1] • Refused (-99) [PROG: Skip to LAD1] PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 113 EXPCHILDAGE At what approximate age would you like to have your first child? Kodi ukufuna udzakhale ndi mwana utafika zaka zingati? ___30______ years • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) EXCHILDNUM And, how many children would you like to have? Ndipo kodi ukufuna uzakhale ndi ana angati? • One (1) • Two (2) • Three (3) • Four (4) • Five (5) • Six (6) • Seven (7) • Eight (8) • More than eight (9) • Don’t know (-98) [PROG: Skip to LAD1] • Refused (-99) [PROG: Skip to LAD1] LADDER EXERCISE (Ladder SHOWCARD) There are nine steps on this ladder. Suppose we say that the ninth step, at the very top, represents the best possible life for you and the bottom represents the worst possible life for you. Pali ma sitepe asanu ndi anayi pa makwerero awa. Nde titanena kuti sitepe ya chisanu ndi chinayi, pamwamba penipeni, ikuyimirira moyo wabwino kwambiri wako ndipo ya pansi moyo wovutikitsitsa wako. LAD 1 Where on the ladder do you feel you personally stand at the present time? Kodi pamakwererowa ukuona kuti uli pati panopa? _________________ Record step number: 1 - 9 • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) LAD 2 Where on the ladder do you think you will be at age 25? Kodi udzakhala uli pati pamakwererowa ukadzafika zaka 25. _________________ Record step number: 1 - 9 • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 114 CONTACT INFORMATION Now I would like to ask you some information that could help us remember who you are. The reason I am asking for this information is that we may want to ask you a few more questions in the future. Panopa ndifuna ndikufunse zokhudza zomwe zingatithandize kukumbukira kuti ndiwe ndani. chifukwa chomwe ndikukufunsira izi ndihoti titha kudzafuna kudzakufunsa mafunso ena oonjezera mtsogolo muno. HASPHONE Do you have a phone number/s where we could reach you or leave a message? (We will capture up to 3 numbers) Kodi uli ndi nambala ya lamya yoti titha kukuyimbira kapena kutumiza uthenga? • Yes (1) • No (2) SKIP to PHONE1 What is your phone number? Nambala ya lamya yanu ndi chani? (For Interviewers: +265 (0) - DO NOT WRITE THE LEADING 0 -+265--------------------------------------------- (Phone Number) Cannot provide a number PHONE1_OWNER Who is the owner of this phone number? Kodi mwini wake wa nambala ya lamyayi ndi ndani? • Self (1) • Mother/Female caregiver (2) • Father/Male caregiver (3) • Grandparents (4) • Brother/Sister (5) • Neighbor (6) • Aunt/Uncle (7) • Cousin (8) • Village leader (9) • Friend/Schoolmate (10) • Teacher / School head teacher (11) • Other, specify (-96) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 115 PHONE1_NAME: What's the full name of the owner of the phone number you gave? Kodi dzina lonse la mwini wake wa nambala ya lamya waperekayi ndi ndani? ___________________________________________ (SECOND PHONE NUMBER) HASPHONE2 Is there another phone number you could give me? • Yes • No PROG: Skip to EMAIL PHONE2 What is your phone number? Kodi nambala ya lamya yako ndi chani?(For Interviewers: +265 (0) - DO NOT WRITE THE LEADING -+265--------------------------------------------- (Phone Number) Cannot provide a number PHONE2_OWNER who is the owner of this phone number? Kodi mwini wake wa nambala ya lamyayi ndi ndani? • Self (1) • Mother/Female caregiver (2) • Father/Male caregiver (3) • Grandparents (4) • Brother/Sister (5) • Neighbor (6) • Aunt/Uncle (7) • Cousin (8) • Village leader (9) • Friend/Schoolmate (10) • Teacher / School head teacher (11) • Other, specify (-96) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 116 PHONE2_NAME What's the full name of the owner of the phone number you gave? Kodi dzina lonse la mwini wake wa nambala ya lamya waperekayi ndi ndani? ______________________________ (THIRD PHONE NUMBER) HASPHONE3 Is there another phone number you could give me? • Yes • No PROG: Skip to EMAIL PHONE3 What is your phone number? Kodi nambala ya lamya yako ndi chani? (For Interviewers: +265 (0) - DO NOT WRITE THE LEADING 0 -+265--------------------------------------------- (Phone Number) Cannot provide a number PHONE3_OWNER Who is the owner of this phone number? Kodi mwini wake wa nambala ya lamyayi ndi ndani? • Self (1) • Mother/Female caregiver (2) • Father/Male caregiver (3) • Grandparents (4) • Brother/Sister (5) • Neighbor (6) • Aunt/Uncle (7) • Cousin (8) • Village leader (9) • Friend/Schoolmate (10) • Teacher / School head teacher (11) • Other, specify (-96) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 117 PHONE3_NAME What's the full name of the owner of the phone number you gave? Kodi dzina lonse la mwini wake wa nambala ya lamya waperekayi ndi ndani? __________________________________ EMAIL Can you give me an electronic email address? Kodi mungandigayileko imelo adiresi? • Yes (1) • No (2) [Skip to Electronic email address (if email=YES) ______________________________ (PLEASE, RECORD HERE THE INFORMATION ON THE LOCATION OF THE RESPONDENT'S FAMILY HOUSE) DISTRICT_HOME What is the District? Kodi ndi boma lanji? • Machinga • Balaka TOWN What is the Village/Town ? Kodi ndi mudzi/tawoni wanji • List of Villages/Towns OTHER_TOWN: Other Village, specify ______________________________ DIRECTIONSHOME Direction to reach the house (for interviewers) Please write directions on how to find the home of the respondent. Start with a location that is well known in the area as a reference point. In the directions, include landmarks, roads, and any other detailed information where relevant. References to specific businesses or homes "(ask for the home of...”) should also be included where possible. ________________________________ PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 118 POSTAL Does your household have an address where you collect mails? Kodi banja lanu lili ndi keyala yomwe mumalindirilako makalata? • Yes (1) • No (2) If yes, Postal address number: (if mail home=yes) address If yes, Road name / Neighborhood: __________________ Mseu END_TEXT: END OF SURVEY, GREAT WORK! DISPOSITION Please enter the final status of this interview • Completed (1) • Refused (2) • Absent from school (3) • No parental consent (4) • Parent refused (5) • Other reason, specify (96) Enumerator Questions PROG: If disposition=1 EUNDERSTAND Did the respondent appear to understand the questions? • Never (1) • Seldom (2) • Some of the time (3) • Most of the time (4) EINTEREST Overall, how was the respondent’s interest in the interview? • Very low (1) • Below average (2) • Average (3) • Above average (4) • Very high (5) COMMENTS: (complete only if something was unusual and merits to known) _______________________________________________________________ PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 119 CAREGIVER INSTRUMENT BASELINE – MAY 2018 FIELD CONTROL Enumerator: Complete the following Information EDIS District boma • Machinga • Balaka ESCH School Name: dzina la sukulu ___________________________________________ ELEAR Learner’s Name: dzina la ophunzira_____________________________________ ESEX Learner’s Sex: • Boy • Girl ESTD Learner’s Standard during current academic year (2017/18) kalasi la ophunzira mu chaka chasukuluchi (2017/18) • Standard 5 • Standard 6 • Standard 7 • Standard 8 LOC Interview Location malo ofunsirana mafunso • School (1) [PROG: go to School] • Household (2) [PROG: go to Household] School [PROG: if LOC=1] SPARENT Are you the parent or guardian of [CHILD NAME]? Kodi ndinu kholo kapena mlezi wa….(dzina la mwana) • Yes • No [PROG: Skip to END] SGRDE What standard is [CHILD NAME] attending currently? Kodi (dzina la mwana) akuphunzira mu kalasi lanji panopa? • Standard 5 [PROG: Skip to Consent] • Standard 6 [PROG: Skip to Consent] • Standard 7 [PROG: Skip to Consent] • Standard 8 [PROG: Skip to Consent] Enumerator needs to confirm the identification of correct learner. If correct, continue with consent. If not correct end interview and find the correct parent/caregiver PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 120 Household [PROG: if LOC=2] No. visit Date Time Disposition Code Appointment Date and Time 1 2 3 Disposition codes: 1: Completed interview 2: No one at home or no adult at home 3: Head of household or adult caregiver is not home 4: Rescheduled (interview postponed and appointment was made) 5: Learner’s household could not be located 6: Partial complete/interview finished 7: Temporary refusal (supervisor to visit) 8: Final refusal 9: Other, specify Replace a household for codes 5 (learner’s household could not be located) and 9 (final refusal); or if a household has been visited 3 times HOUSE Is this the home of [CHILD NAME]? Kodi ili ndi khomo la …(dzina la mwana) • Yes [PROG: Skip to CARE] • No FIND Do you know where I can find [CHILD NAME]’s household? Kodi mukudziwako komwe ndingathe kupeza khomo la kwawo kwa (dzina la mwana) • Yes [Enumerator: Collect information to find household] • No [PROG: Go to end] CARE Is the parent or adult caregiver of [CHILD NAME] available? Kodi kholo kapena mlezi wa (dzina la mwana) aliko? • Yes [PROG: Skip to SCHL] • No APPT When could I find the parent or adult caregiver of [CHILD NAME]? Kodi ndingalipeze liti kholo kapena mlezi wa (dzina la mwana)? Date: Time: [PROG: Skip to END] SCHL What was [CHILD NAME’S] school this academic year? Kodi (dzina la mwana) amaphuynzira sukulu yanji mu chaka chasukuluchi? PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 121 GRDE What standard is [CHILD NAME] attending currently? Kodi (dzina la mwana) akuphunzira kalasi yanji panopa? • Standard 5 • Standard 6 • Standard 7 • Standard 8 Enumerator needs to confirm the identification of correct learner. If correct, continue with consent. If not correct end interview and find the correct parent/caregiver Consent chilolezo Hello, we are working with Invest in Knowledge and NORC, a research organization, to learn about how students in Malawi. The Ministry of Education Science and Technology has approved this research work. Zikomo, ife tikugwira ntchito ndi Invest in Knowledge ndi NORC, bungwe la kafukufuku, kufuna kuphunzira za ana asukulu kuno ku Malawi. A unduna wa zamaphunziro sayansi ndi luso avomereza kafukufukuyu. You might remember that we sent a letter for you to sign in order to interview your child. Now we would like to ask about your own opinions regarding education, marriage, work, and employment. There are no right or wrong answers; I would like to know what you think. Pano ndikufuna ndikufunseni maganizo anu pa nkhani zokhudza maphunziro, ma ukwati, komanso nkhani za ntchito.. Palibe mayankho olondola kapena olakwa; ndikufuna kudziwa zomwe mumaganiza. This survey is voluntary. If you choose not to participate, there will be no consequences of any type for you or your child. The choice not to participate will not affect your child’s grade/standing at school and does not entail any penalty or loss of benefits. Kafukufukuyu ngongodzipereka chabe. Ngati musankhe kusatengapo mbali, palibe chilango chomwe chidzaperekedwe kwa inu kapena mwana wanu. Chisankho chosatengapo mbali sichikhudza malikisi kapena makhozedwe a mwana wanu ku sukulu ndipo sizikutanthauza chilango kapena kuluza zolowa. We will keep your responses confidential and nothing that you say will be shared with anyone outside of the research team. Your identity will always be kept confidential and your name will never be used. Tidzasunga mayankho anu mwachinsinsi ndipo chilichonse chomwe muyankhule sichidzanenedwa kwa wina aliyense oti si wamukafukufukuyu. Zokhudza inu zidzasungidwa mwachinsinsi ndipo dzina lanu silidzagwiritsidwa ntchito. You are free to not answer any questions you are not comfortable with or to stop the interview at any time. Muli ndi ufulu osayankha funso lilironse lomwe musali omasuka nalo kapena kusiya kuyankha mafunso nthawi yiliyonse. This survey will take about 15 minutes. Kafukufukuyu atenga pafupi fupi mphindi khumi ndi zisanu. Ngati muli ndi mafunso ena aliwonse, mutha kufunsa panopa kapena nthawi yina, kapenanso kufunsana mafunso kukatha. Ngati mukufuna kufunsa mafunso nthawi yina, mutha kuyankhulana ndi a James Mkandawire omwe akuyang’anira kafukufukuyu kuno ku Malawi pa nambala iyi 0888370081 kapena mutha kulemba kalata ku P.O. Box 506 Zomba. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 122 If you have questions, complaints, or get sick or injured as a result of being in this study. Call or contact the National Committee on Research in Social Sciences and Humanities (NCRSH) if you have questions about your rights as a study participant. You may also contact the NCRSH if you feel you have not been treated fairly or if you have other concerns. Their contact information is: NCST, 1st Floor Lingadzi House, Robert Mugabe Crescent, Private Bag B303, Lilongwe 3, Malawi.Email: directorgeneral@ncst.mw Phone: +265 1 771 550 Ngati muli ndi mafunso, madandaulo, kapena mudwala kapena kuvulala chifukwa chotenga nawo mbali mukafukufukuyu. Imbani kapena kumanani ndi a National Committee on Research in Social Sciences and Humanities (NCRSH)Ngati muli ndi mafunso okhudza ufulu wanu monga wotenga nawo mbali, mukhonza kufunsa a NCRSH. Ngati mukuona kuti mwachitidwa nkhanaza kapena muli ndi nkhawa zina adilesi yawo CONSENT Do you agree to participate in this study? Kodi mukuvomera kutenga nawo mbali mu kafukufukuyu? • Yes • No SEX Observe: What is the respondent’s gender? Kodi mtengambali ndi wamkazi kapena wamwamuna? • Male • Female AGE What is your age? Kodi zaka zako ndi zingati? _ _ years EDU What was the highest level of education that you completed? Kodi sukulu unamalizira pati? • No schooling (1) • Some primary (2) • Complete primary (3) [PROG: GO TO RLT] • Some secondary (4) [PROG: GO TO RLT] • Complete secondary (5) [PROG: GO TO RLT] • Higher than secondary (6) [PROG: GO TO RLT] • Other, specify_______________________________(96) [PROG: GO TO RLT] • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 123 RW Do you know how to write and read? Kodi mumadziwa kulemba ndi kuwerenga ? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Refuse (-99) RLT What is your relationship to [CHILD NAME]? Kodi pali ubale wanji ndi (dzina la mwana) • Mother (1) • Father (2) • Step-mother (11) • Step-father (12) • Grandmother (3) • Grandfather (4) • Aunt (5) • Uncle (6) • Sister (7) • Brother (8) • Cousin (9) • Friend (10) • Other: ________(96) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) OPINIONS ABOUT GENDER NORMS I am going to read a number of statements about how people think that girls, boys, men and women should behave. Please consider each statement carefully and decide which of the following options best describes your view: If I read out the statement you may answer 1 = Strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly agree, depending on you own view Pano ndikuwerengera ziganizo zingapo za momwe anthu amaganizira kuti atsikana, anyamata, amuna ndi azimayi ayenera kukhalira. Ganizra ziganizo izi bwinobwino ndipo undiwuze kuti ndi ziti mwa izi zikuyimira momwe iwe umaziwonera zinthuzi. Untha kundiyanka kuti ukusutsana nazo kwambiri, ukusutsana nazo, uli pakatikati, ukugwirizana nazo, ukugwirizana nazo kwambiri. 1 = Strongly disagree (Kusutsana nazo kwambiri) 2 = Disagree (Kusutsana nazo) 3 = Neutral (Pakatikati) 4 = Agree (Kugwirizana nazo) 5 = Strongly agree (Kugwirizana nazo kwambiri). (Agree SHOWCARD) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 124 Ok, are you ready? Let’s start. Kodi wakonzeka? (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Gen1 Boys are usually more intelligent than girls Nthawi zambiri anyamata ndi anzeru kuposa atsikana Gen2 Boys are naturally better at math and science than girls Mwachibadwa anyamata amachita bwino pa maphunziro a masamu ndi a sayansi kuposa atsikana Gen3 It is more important for boys to do well in school than it is for girls. Ndi chabwino kwambiri kuti anyamata azichita bwino mukalasi kusiyana ndi atsikana Gen4 Since girls have to get married, they should not be sent for higher education. Chifukwa atsikana ayenera kukwatiwa, sayenera kutumizidwa ku maphunziro apamwamba Gen5 Girls like it when boys tease and make fun of them. Atsikana amasangalara ngati anyamata akuwaselewula iwo? Gen6 Girls provoke boys by wearing short dresses. Atsikana amakopa anyamata povala ma diresi aafupi. Gen7 It is a girl’s fault if a teacher sexually harasses her. Ndi vuto lamtsikana ngati mphunzitsi aseweretsa thupi lake. Gen8 It is acceptable for a teacher to get a learner pregnant if he marries her. Ndizovomerezeka mphunzitsi kupereka mimba ngati atamukwatire Gen9 It is unacceptable for a woman to disagree with her husband. Sizovomerezeka kuti mzimayi asutsane ndi mwamuna wake Gen10 Men need more care as they work harder than women Azibambo amfunika chisamaliro chambiri chifukwa magwira ntchito zamphamvu kusiyana ndi azimayi Gen11 Bathing and feeding the children are the mother’s responsibility. Kasambitsa ndi kudyetsa ana ndi ntchito ya azimayi PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 125 Gen12 There are times when a man needs to beat his wife. Pali nthawi zina zoti mzibambo ayenera kumenya mkazi wake Gen13 A mother should tolerate violence from the father in order to keep the family together. Mayi ayenera kupirira nkhanza kuchokera kwa mwamuna wake kuti banja lisapasuke Gen14 A woman’s most important role is to take care of the family and cook Udindo ofunikira kwambiri kwa mzimayi ndi kusamala banja ndi kuphika Gen15 A woman should always obey her husband Mkazi ayenera kumvera mwamuna wake nthawi zonse Gen16 A woman should have the right to divorce Mkazi ayenera kukhala ndi ufulu wothetsa banja. PARENT/GUARDIAN’S ASPIRATIONS AND EXPECTATIONS I am now going to ask you your opinion on various issues. There are no right and wrong answers. I just want to know what you think. Panopa ndikufunsani za maganizo anu pa zinthu zosiyana siyana. Palibe mayankho okhoza ndi olondola. Ndingofuna kudziwa mmene mumaganizira. LEVELSCH Ideally what is the highest level of formal education would you like [Child Name] to complete? Mukuganiza kwanu mukufuna kuti (dzina la mwana) ataphunzira kumalizira pati sukulu • Standard 5 • Standard 6 • Standard 7 • Standard 8 • Form 1 • Form 2 • Form 3 • Form 4 • Some Vocational or technical school after secondary school • Finish vocational or technical school after secondary school • College or university • Other (specify)_____________________________ • Don’t know (-98) SKIP TO JOB2 • Refused (-99) SKIP TO JOB2 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 126 CMPTSCHL Do you expect [Child Name] to complete that level of education? Mukuyembekezera kuti (dzina la mwana) adzamaliza maphunziro ake pa mulingo umenewo? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • No response (-99) JOB2 Think about [ChildName] at 25, would you like her/him to hold a job or work? Ganizani za (dzina la mwana) pa zaka 25, kodi mukufuna atadzakhala pa ntchito kapena kugwira ntchito? • Yes (1) • No (2) [PROG: Skip to ACTIV] • Don’t know (-98) [PROG: Skip to ACTIV] • No response (-99) [PROG: Skip to ACTIV] JOBTYPE What kind of job or work would you most like [ChildName] to do at that age? Kodi mungafune kwambiri kuti (dzina la mwana) atadzagwira ntchito yanji pa zaka zimenezo? (Do not prompt. Enter code from provided list) OTHER Specify _________ 01=Accountant 02=Actor/actress 03=Administrative Assistant/Secretary/Clerical 04=Artist 05=Civil servant 06=Computer operator 07=Construction worker 08=Cook 09=Dentist 10=Doctor/Physician 11=Domestic Worker 12=Driver/Conductor 13=Electrician 14=Engineer 15=Factory worker 16=Farmer 17=Firemean/Firewoman 18=Fisherman/woman 19=Fulltime parent/Housewife 20=Journalist 21=Labourer/Unskilled 22=Lawyer 23=Lecturer/Professor 24=Manager 25=Market Trader/shop assistant 26=Mason/Builder PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 127 27=Mechanic 28=Nurse 29=Painter/decorator 30=Pilot 31=Policeman/woman 32=Politician 33=President/leader of country 34=Religious leader/priest/imam/shaik/pastor 35=Security Guard 36=Scientist 37=Singer 38=Soldier 39=Sportsman/woman 40=Tailor/Seamstress 41=Taxi Driver 42=Teacher 43=Trader/businessman/woman 44=Veterinarian 96=Other -98=Don’t know -99=Refuse JOB When [Child Name] is about 25 years old, what job or activity do you think s/he will actually be doing? [Enumerator: Do not prompt. Enter code in provided list] Pamene (dzina la mwana) adzakwanitse zaka 25, kodi ndi ntchito yanji yomwe azidzagwira kapena azidzapanga chani? ______________ OTHER Specify ___________________ ACTIV If you don’t want [ChildName] to have a job or be working at 25, what would you like him/her to be doing? Ngati simukufuna (dzina la mwana) atadzakhala pantchito kapena kugwira ntchito pa zaka 25, mukufuna iyeyo azidzapanga chani? • Studying • Taking care of his/her household/children • Nothing • Volunteer • Travel • Other. Specify_______________ • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 128 LADDER EXERCISE (Ladder SHOWCARD) There are nine steps on this ladder. Suppose we say that the ninth step, at the very top, represents the best possible life for you and the bottom represents the worst possible life for you. Pali ma sitepe asanu ndi anayi pa makwerero awa. Nde titanena kuti sitepe ya chisanu ndi chinayi, pamwamba penipeni, ikuyimirira moyo wabwino kwambiri wanu ndipo ya pansi moyo wovutikitsitsa wanu. LAD1 Where on the ladder do you feel you personally stand at the present time? Kodi mukuganiza kuti muli pati pa makwerero awa panopa? Record step number: 1-9 [ __ ] LAD2 Where do you think you will be on the ladder in four years from now? Kodi mukuganiza kuti muzakhala uli pati pa makwerero pa zaka zinayi zikubwerazi? Record step number: 1-9 [ __ ] LAD3 Where do you think that [ChildName] will be when he/she is your age? Kodi mukuganiza kuti (dzina la mwana) adzakhala ali pati pa msinkhu wanu? Record step number: 1-9 [ __ ] CHILD EXPECTATIONS Now, I am going to ask you about some of your expectations for [Child Name]’s life specifically. Panopa ndikufunsani za zina mwa ziyembekezo pa moyo wa (dzina la mwana) maka maka. At what age do you expect [ChildName] to: Kodi ndi pa zaka zingati pamene mukuyembekezerta kuti (dzina la mwana) adza: EXP1 Start earning money to support your household? [ __ __ ] Not able ( -97) DKN(-98) Yambe kupeza ndalama zothandizira nyumba yanu? EXP2 Leave full-time education? [ __ __ ] Not able ( -97) DKN(-98) Kusiyiya shool yomapita tsiku ndi tsiku? EXP3 Be financially independent of HIS/HER parents? [ __ __ ] Not able ( -97) DKN(-98) Khale odziyimira payekha pa zachuma osadalira makolo? EXP4 Leave this household? [ __ __ ] Not able ( -97) DKN(-98) chokepo pa khomo lino? EXP5 Get married and start living together with a husband/wife? [ __ __ ] Not able ( -97) DKN(-98) kwatiwe nkuyamba kukhala limodzi ndi mwamuna/mkazi? EXP6 Have a child? [ __ __ ] Not able ( -97) DKN(-98) Khale ndi mwana? PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 129 CONTACT INFORMATION Now I would like to ask you some information that could help us remember who you are. The reason I am asking for this information is that we may want to ask you a few more questions in the future. Panopa ndifuna ndikufunse zokhudza zomwe zingatithandize kukumbukira kuti ndiwe ndani. chifukwa chomwe ndikukufunsira izi ndihoti titha kudzafuna kudzakufunsa mafunso ena oonjezera mtsogolo muno. HASPHONE Do you have a phone number/s where we could reach you or leave a message? Kodi uli ndi nambala ya lamya yoti titha kukuyimbira kapena kutumiza uthenga? • Yes (1) • No (2) SKIP to PHONE1 What is your phone number? Nambala ya lamya yanu ndi chani? (For Interviewers: +265 (0) - DO NOT WRITE THE LEADING 0
Enter -95 if no phone number can be provided.) -+265--------------------------------------------- (Phone Number) Cannot provide a number PHONE1_OWNER Who is the owner of this phone number? Kodi mwini wake wa nambala ya lamyayi ndi ndani? • Mother/Female caregiver (2) • Father/Male caregiver (3) • Grandparents (4) • Brother/Sister (5) • Neighbor (6) • Aunt/Uncle (7) • Cousin (8) • Village leader (9) • Friend/Schoolmate (10) • Teacher / School head teacher (11) • Other, specify (-96) PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 130 PHONE1_NAME: What's the full name of the owner of the phone number you gave? Kodi dzina lonse la mwini wake wa nambala ya lamya waperekayi ndi ndani? EMAIL. Can you give me an electronic email address? • Yes • No • Don’t Know (-98) • Refused (-99) EMAIL_ADDRESS ____________________________________________ DIRECTIONSHOME Direction to reach the house (for interviewers) Please write directions on how to find the home of the respondent. Start with a location that is well known in the area as a reference point. In the directions, include landmarks, roads, and any other detailed information where relevant. References to specific businesses or homes "(ask for the home of...”) should also be included where possible. ________________________________ END_TEXT END OF SURVEY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH! PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 131 COMMUNITY LEADER SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW - BASELINE MAY 2018 Introduction and Consent chiyambi ndi chilolezo Hello, we are working with Invest in Knowledge and NORC, a research organization, to learn about students in Malawi. This research has been approved by the NORC Ethics Board, the National Committee on Research in the Social Sciences (NCRSH) and the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. Zikomo, ife tikugwira ntchito ndi Invest in Knowledge ndi NORC, bungwe la kafukufuku, kufuna kuphunzira za ana asukulu kuno ku Malawi. Kafukufukuyu wavomerezedwa ndi ounika malamulo a NORC, komiti ya kafukufuku ya dziko ya social science ndi aunduna wa zamaphunziro, sayansi ndi luso. The main purpose of this interview is to learn about education decisions and ideals. You might know that we are interviewing students and parents in this area. Now we would like to ask about your own opinions and ideas regarding education, marriage, and work of youth. There are no right or wrong answers; I would like to know what you think. Cholinga cheni cheni cha mafunsowa ndikufuna kuphunzira za zisankho ndi ziganizo zokhudza maphunziro. Mukuyenera kudziwa kuti tikufunsa ophunzira ndi makolo a mudera lino. Panopa tikufuna tifunse za maganizo anu zokhudza maphunziro, banja, ndi ntchito za achinyamata. Palibe mayankho olondola ndi okhoza; ndingofuna kudziwa mmene mumaganizira. This survey is voluntary. If you choose not to participate, there will be no consequences of any type for you or your child. The choice not to participate will not affect your child’s grade/standing at school and does not entail any penalty or loss of benefits. Kafukufukuyu ngongodzipereka chabe. Ngati musankhe kusatengapo mbali, palibe chilango chomwe chidzaperekedwe kwa inu kapena mwana wanu. Chisankho chosatengapo mbali sichikhudza malikisi kapena makhozedwe a mwana wanu ku sukulu ndipo sizikutanthauza chilango kapena kuluza zolowa. We will keep your responses confidential and nothing that you say will be shared with anyone outside of the research team. Your identity will always be kept confidential and your name will never be used. Tidzasunga mayankho anu mwachinsinsi ndipo chilichonse chomwe muyankhule sichidzanenedwa kwa wina aliyense oti si wamukafukufukuyu. Zokhudza inu zidzasungidwa mwachinsinsi ndipo dzina lanu silidzagwiritsidwa ntchito. You are free to not answer any questions you are not comfortable with or to stop the interview at any time. Muli ndi ufulu osayankha funso lilironse lomwe musali omasuka nalo kapena kusiya kuyankha mafunso nthawi yiliyonse. This survey will take about 15 minutes. Kafukufukuyu atenga pafupifupi mphindi khumi ndi zisanu. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 132 If you have any questions, you may ask them now or later, even after the interview has been completed. If you wish to ask questions later, you may contact: Ngati muli ndi mafunso ena aliwonse, mutha kufunsa panopa kapena nthawi yina, kapenanso kufunsana mafunso kukatha. Ngati mukufuna kufunsa mafunso nthawi yina, mutha kuyankhulana ndi: a James Mkandawire omwe akuyang’anira kafukufukuyu kuno ku Malawi pa nambala iyi 0888370081 kapena mutha kulemba kalata ku P.O. Box 506 Zomba. If you have questions, complaints, or get sick or injured as a result of being in this study. Call or contact the National Committee on Research in Social Sciences and Humanities (NCRSH) if you have questions about your rights as a study participant. You may also contact the NCRSH if you feel you have not been treated fairly or if you have other concerns. Their contact information is: NCST, 1st Floor Lingadzi House, Robert Mugabe Crescent, Private Bag B303, Lilongwe 3, Malawi.Email: directorgeneral@ncst.mw Phone: +265 1 771 550 Ngati muli ndi mafunso, madandaulo, kapena mudwala kapena kuvulala chifukwa chotenga nawo mbali mukafukufukuyu. Imbani kapena kumanani ndi a National Committee on Research in Social Sciences and Humanities (NCRSH)Ngati muli ndi mafunso okhudza ufulu wanu monga wotenga nawo mbali, mukhonza kufunsa a NCRSH. Ngati mukuona kuti mwachitidwa nkhanaza kapena muli ndi nkhawa zina adilesi yawo NCST 1st Floor Lingadzi House, Robert Mugabe Crescent, Private Bag B303, Lilongwe 3, Malawi. Email: directorgeneral@ncst.mw Phone: +265 1 771 550 CONSENT Do you agree to participate in this study? Kodi mukuvomera kutenga nawo mbali mu kafukufukuyu? • Yes • No DISTRICT boma • Machinga • Balaka PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 133 TOWN Town Name dzina la mudzi_________________________ SEX Observe: What is the respondent’s gender? Kodi oyankha mafunso ndi wamkazi kapena wamwamuna • Male • Female (ask if not clear) AGE What is your age? Muli ndi zaka zingati? _ _ years Refuse (-99) EDU What was the highest level of education that you completed? Kodi sukulu munamalizira pati kuphunzira • No schooling (1) • Some primary (2) • Complete primary (3) • Some secondary (4) • Complete secondary (5) • Higher than secondary (6) • Other, specify_______________________________(96) • Don’t know (-98) • Refused (-99) Enumerator: If response to EDU is 1 or 2 then ask the following question RW Do you know how to read and write? Kodi mumadziwa kuwerenga ndi kulemba? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Refuse (-99) POSITION What is your current position in this community? Kodi muli ndi udindo wanji panopa mudera lanu lino? WORKPLACE What is your current place of work or institution? Kodi panopa mukugwira ntchito kuti? I am going to read a number of statements about how people think that girls, boys, men and women should behave. Please consider each statement carefully and decide which of the following options best describes your view: Ndiwerenga ziganizo zingapo za momwe anthu amaganizira za momwe atsikana, anyamata, amuna ndi akazi azikhalira. Chonde mulingalire chiganizo hilichonse mosamala ndi kupanga chisankho kuti ndi chisankho chiti chomwe chikulongosola maganizidwe anu. 1 = Strongly disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly agree. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 134 (Agree SHOWCARD) Ok, are you ready? Let’s start. Kodi wakonzeka? (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Gen1 Boys are usually more intelligent than girls. Nthawi zambiri anyamata ndi anzeru kuposa atsikana Gen2 Boys are naturally better at math and science than girls Mwachibadwa anyamata amachita bwino pa maphunziro a masamu ndi a sayansi kuposa atsikana Gen3 It is more important for boys to do well in school than it is for girls. Ndi chabwino kwambiri kuti anyamata azichita bwino mukalasi kusiyana ndi atsikana Gen4 Since girls have to get married, they should not be sent for higher education. Chifukwa atsikana ayenera kukwatiwa, sayenera kutumizidwa ku maphunziro apamwamba Gen5 Girls like it when boys tease and make fun of them. Atsikana amasangalara ngati anyamata akuwaselewula iwo? Gen6 Girls provoke boys by wearing short dresses. Atsikana amakopa anyamata povala ma diresi aafupi. Gen7 It is a girl’s fault if a teacher sexually harasses her. Ndi vuto lamtsikana ngati mphunzitsi aseweretsa thupi lake. Gen8 It is acceptable for a teacher to get a learner pregnant if he marries her. Ndizovomerezeka mphunzitsi kupereka mimba kwa mwana wasukulu ngati atamukwatire Gen9 It is unacceptable for a woman to disagree with her husband. Sizovomerezeka kuti mzimayi asutsane ndi mwamuna wake Gen10 Men need more care as they work harder than women. Azibambo amfunika chisamaliro chambiri chifukwa magwira ntchito zamphamvu kusiyana ndi azimayi Gen11 Bathing and feeding the children are the mother’s responsibility. Kasambitsa ndi kudyetsa ana ndi ntchito ya azimayi PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 135 Gen12 There are times when a man needs to beat his wife. Pali nthawi zina zoti mzibambo ayenera kumenya mkazi wake Gen13 A mother should tolerate violence from the father in order to keep the family together. Mayi ayenera kupirira nkhanza kuchokera kwa mwamuna wake kuti banja lisapasuke Gen14 A woman’s most important role is to take care of the family and cook Ntchito ya mzimayi yeni yeni ndi yosamala banja ndi ku phika Gen15 A woman should always obey her husband Mkazi ayenera kumvera mwamuna wake nthawi zones Gen16 A woman should have the right to divorce Mkazi ayenera kukhala ndi ufulu wothetsa banja. EDU_LEVEL B Ideally, what level of education do you think a boy should try to reach? Mmene mukuganizira, kodi mnyamata ayenera kuyesetsa kufika pati wanji pa maphunziro. Why? Chifukwa chani? EDU_LEVEL_G And how about girls? Ideally what level of education should they aim for? Nanga atsikana? Mukuganiza kuti azilaka laka kufikira mlingo wanji pa maphunziro? Why? Chifukwa chani? If less than boys, ask why there is a difference Ngati wachepa kwa amuna, funsani chifukwa chani zikusiyana CMPTSCHL_B Do you expect boys in this community to complete that level of education? Kodi mukyembekezera amuna kumaliza mlingo wa maphunziro umenewu? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • No response (-99) What percentage of boys will complete Secondary school? Kodi ndi anyamata angati pa makumi khumi angamalize mlingo umenewu? (use more less than half/less than one quarter ,etc. if percentage is a problem) Do you think some of those boys will go to the University/College? How many? A handful? More? Kodi mukuganiza kuti ena mwa anyamata amenewo adzapita ku sukulu ya ukachenjede? Angati? Ochepa? Ambiri? PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 136 BARRIERS_B If no, what are the main problems/challenges for boys? Ngati ayi, kodi ndi mavuto/zikhomo zikulu zikulu za a anyamata? CMPTSCHL_G Do you expect girls in this community to complete that level of education? Kodi mukiuyembekezera kuti atsikana a mdera lino atha kumaliza mlingo umenewo wamaphunziro? • Yes (1) • No (2) • Don’t know (-98) • No response (-99) What percentage of girls will complete Secondary school? Kodi ndi atsikana angati pa makumi khumi angamalize sekondale sukulu? (use more less than half/less than one quarter ,etc. if percentage is a problem) Do you think some of those girls will go to the University/College? How many? A handful? More? Kodi mukuganiza kuti ena mwa atsikana amenewo adzapita ku sukulu ya ukachenjede? Angati? Ochepa? Ambiri? BARRIERS_G If no, what are the main problems/challenges for girls? Ngati ayi, kodi ndi mavuto/zikhomo zikulu zikulu za a atsikana? COMM_EDU_OPINION Do you think that most people in this community would agree with your opinion about ideal levels of education for boys and girls? Would they aspire to higher levels of education? Or lower? kodi mukuganiza kuti anthu ambiri mu dera lino atha kuvomerezana nanu pa maganizo a mlingo wa maphunziro a anyamata ndi atsikana?kodi atha kukhumbira mlingo wapamwamba wamaphunziro? Kapena ocheperapo? JOB_B What types of job or activity do you expect that an average boy of this community who is 12-14 years of age today would be doing at age 25?kodi ndi mtundu wanji wa ntchito kapena zochita zomwe mumayembekezera kuti mnyamata wapakatikati mdera lino wa zaka khumi ndi ziwiri mpaka khumi ndi zinayi panopa, atha kuchita pa zaka 25? JOB_G What types of job or activity do you expect that an average girl of this community who is 12-14 years of age today would be doing at age 25? kodi ndi mtundu wanji wa ntchito kapena zochita zomwe mumayembekezera kuti mtsikana wapakatikati mdera lino wa zaka khumi ndi ziwiri mpaka khumi ndi zinayi panopa, atha kuchita pa zaka 25? MARRIED_G What is an ideal age for a girl to get married? Kodi mtsikana ayenera kukwatiwa ali ndi zaka zingati? MARRIED_B And for a boy? Nanga mnyamata? CHILD Do you think everyone should have children? Kodi mukuganiza kuti aliyense ayenera kukhala ndi mwana? Why? Chifukwa chani? CHILD_M How about the ideal age to have children? For a Man? Nanga zaka zoyenerera kukhala ndi mwana? Kwa mwamuna? Why? Chifukwa chani? PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 137 CHILD_W And, for a Woman? Nanga kwa mkazi? Why? Chifukwa chani? FAM_SIZE What is the ideal family size? Kodi kukula kwa banja koyenerera ndi chani? Is there anything you would like to add? Muli ndi choonjezera chilichonse? Thank you! Zikomo? PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 138 ANNEX IV: ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS Disabilities From the disability responses, we calculated four separate disability definitions using guidelines from the Washington Group on Disability Statistics34, where the level 1 definition is the least demanding and the level 4 definition is the most demanding. Figure A1 shows that 45.3% of students have some type of disability using the level 1 definition, while 16.1% and 1.9% have disabilities using the level 2 and 3 definitions, respectively. No students have a level 4 definition disability, defined as having a least one of the six ability areas coded as “cannot do it at all”. Figure A1. Students with Disabilities 0 10 20 30 40 50 % of Students Note: Level 1 disability is at least one domain coded SOME DIFFICULTY, A LOT OF DIFFICULTY, or CANNOT DO AT ALL. Level 2 disability is at least one domain coded A LOT OF DIFFICULTY, or CANNOT DO AT ALL. Level 3 disability is at least two domains coded SOME DIFFICULTY, or at least one coded A LOT OF DIFFICULTY, or CANNOT DO AT ALL. Level 4 disability is at least one domain coded CANNOT DO AT ALL. Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 As we mentioned in the main text, we think that learners do no properly understand the questions about difficulties thinking (e.g. concentranting and remembering) and communicating and these categories are overstating disability problems. 34 Washington Group on Disability Statistics. 2017. “Analytic Guidelines: Creating Disability Identifiers Using the Washington Group Short Set (WG-SS) SPSS Syntax”, 23 October. From: http://www.washingtongroup-disability.com/wp￾content/uploads/2016/12/WG-Document-5-Analytic-Guidelines-for-the-Washington-Group-Short-Set.pdf PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 139 Attitudes towards Gender Norms – Students Distributions Figure AIV.1. Student Responses to Gender Attitude Questions – Academic Ability 41.7 45.0 5.2 5.8 2.3 22.6 38.9 12.8 16.7 9.0 12.8 27.5 13.7 30.9 15.1 19.5 28.6 12.2 25.6 14.2 0 20 40 60 80 100 % of Students Girls have to get married, so should not go to higher education It is more important for boys to do well in school Boys are naturally better at math and science Boys are usually more intelligent Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree Figure AIV.2. Student Responses to Gender Attitude Questions – Gender Relations in School 44.8 42.5 3.4 6.5 2.9 23.0 36.3 6.1 25.2 9.3 15.3 28.0 5.9 35.3 15.5 22.3 48.1 10.3 14.7 4.7 0 20 40 60 80 100 % of Students It is acceptable for a teacher to get a learner pregnant if he marries her If a teacher sexually harasses a girl, it is her fault Girls provoke boys by wearing short dresses Girls like it when boys tease and make fun of them Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 140 Figure AIV.3. Student Responses to Gender Attitude Questions – Gender Roles 6.6 14.2 10.0 47.5 21.7 6.7 16.2 10.0 44.4 22.6 8.2 16.0 10.4 41.7 23.7 0 20 40 60 80 100 % of Students The most important role for women is to take care of the family and cook Bathing and feeding the children is the responsibility of the mother Men need more care, as they work harder Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree Figure AIV.4. Student Responses to Gender Attitude Questions – Women’s Rights 13.7 39.9 9.8 24.6 12.0 3.1 6.3 7.2 54.3 29.1 20.4 35.1 9.2 26.5 8.9 34.1 47.9 5.3 10.6 2.1 14.2 32.4 14.2 29.5 9.7 0 20 40 60 80 100 % of Students A woman should have the right to divorce A woman should always obey her husband A mother should tolerate violence from the father to keep the family together There are times when a man needs to beat his wife It is unacceptable for a woman to disagree with her husband Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 141 ANNEX V: BALANCE BETWEEN TREATMENT AND CONTROL GROUPS Table AV.1 Balance between Treatment and Control (1) (2) (1)-(2) Treatment Comparison Difference Variable Mean/SE Mean/SE Student Grade = Standard 5 0.254 0.255 -0.001 [0.004] [0.003] Student Grade = Standard 6 0.255 0.250 0.005 [0.004] [0.002] Student Grade = Standard 7 0.253 0.247 0.006 [0.004] [0.003] Student Grade = Standard 8 0.238 0.249 -0.011 [0.010] [0.002] Student is repeating the grade level 0.213 0.192 0.021 [0.027] [0.019] How old are you? 14.468 14.250 0.218 [0.097] [0.118] Student Sex = Female 0.500 0.514 -0.014 [0.011] [0.006] Mother's Education = None 0.150 0.152 -0.001 [0.030] [0.024] Mother's Education = Some primary 0.610 0.551 0.059 [0.020] [0.029] Mother's Education = Complete primary 0.126 0.146 -0.020 [0.014] [0.015] Mother's Education = Some secondary 0.093 0.105 -0.012 [0.017] [0.022] Mother's Education = Complete secondary 0.014 0.032 -0.018* [0.006] [0.008] Mother's Education = Higher than secondary 0.006 0.011 -0.005 [0.003] [0.004] Mother's Education = Other 0.002 0.004 -0.003 [0.001] [0.002] On-Track Education (according to age-for-grade schedule) 0.187 0.231 -0.044* [0.014] [0.021] Student missed at least 1 day of school last week 0.280 0.279 0.001 [0.030] [0.023] How many days did you miss school last week? 0.521 0.555 -0.034 [0.065] [0.049] How long does it take you to travel from home to school, in minutes? 45.944 44.628 1.316 [2.877] [1.699] Did you eat anything today? 0.364 0.397 -0.032 [0.041] [0.039] PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 142 (1) (2) (1)-(2) Treatment Comparison Difference Variable Mean/SE Mean/SE Asset Index 1.799 1.973 -0.174 [0.118] [0.070] Student would like to continue to university after secondary school 0.869 0.848 0.020 [0.015] [0.015] Think about yourself at age 25, would you like to have job or be working at that 0.933 0.932 0.001 [0.012] [0.011] Would you like to get married at some point in your life? 0.889 0.883 0.006 [0.030] [0.016] At what approximate age would you like to get married? 28.372 28.531 -0.159 [0.191] [0.170] Would you like to have children at some point in your life? 0.900 0.897 0.003 [0.026] [0.014] At what approximate age would you like to have your first child? 30.420 30.737 -0.317 [0.254] [0.219] Where on the ladder do you feel you personally stand at the present time? 3.314 3.435 -0.121 [0.110] [0.151] Where on the ladder do you think you will be at age 25? 7.081 7.043 0.038 [0.094] [0.098] Student Gender attitudes Index (0=Biased; 1=Equal) 0.532 0.542 -0.011 [0.006] [0.007] Level 1 Disability 0.437 0.467 -0.030 [0.027] [0.019] Level 2 Disability 0.149 0.172 -0.023 [0.021] [0.018] Level 3 Disability 0.023 0.016 0.007 [0.006] [0.004] Caregiver's Sex = Female 0.728 0.756 -0.028 [0.030] [0.022] What is your age? 40.886 41.373 -0.487 [0.665] [0.570] Student Sex = Female 0.495 0.503 -0.008 [0.010] [0.008] Student Grade = Standard 5 0.248 0.255 -0.007 [0.005] [0.003] Student Grade = Standard 6 0.250 0.246 0.004 [0.005] [0.005] Student Grade = Standard 7 0.255 0.251 0.004 [0.004] [0.005] Student Grade = Standard 8 0.248 0.248 -0.001 [0.005] [0.004] Caregiver's Education = None 0.202 0.188 0.015 [0.029] [0.028] Caregiver's Education = Some primary 0.537 0.533 0.005 [0.016] [0.027] Caregiver's Education = Complete primary 0.104 0.131 -0.027 [0.016] [0.015] Caregiver's Education = Some secondary 0.096 0.092 0.005 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 143 (1) (2) (1)-(2) Treatment Comparison Difference Variable Mean/SE Mean/SE [0.015] [0.021] Caregiver's Education = Complete secondary 0.041 0.039 0.002 [0.010] [0.008] Caregiver's Education = Higher than secondary 0.017 0.013 0.004 [0.008] [0.005] Caregiver's Education = Other 0.002 0.004 -0.002 [0.002] [0.004] Caregiver = Parent 0.802 0.769 0.034 [0.025] [0.020] Caregiver = Grandparent 0.087 0.098 -0.012 [0.018] [0.013] Caregiver = Aunt/Uncle 0.055 0.046 0.010 [0.011] [0.007] Caregiver = Sibling 0.055 0.074 -0.019 [0.011] [0.011] Do you know how to write and read? 0.542 0.575 -0.033 [0.037] [0.039] Caregiver Gender attitudes Index (0=Biased; 1=Equal) 0.505 0.502 0.003 [0.013] [0.008] Caregiver would like student to continue to university after secondary school 0.826 0.800 0.026 [0.022] [0.026] Think about [ChildName] at 25, would you like her/him to hold a job or work? 0.949 0.950 -0.000 [0.015] [0.014] Where on the ladder do you feel you personally stand at the present time? 2.687 2.709 -0.022 [0.103] [0.118] Where do you think you will be on the ladder in four years from now? 4.337 4.397 -0.061 [0.117] [0.128] Where do you think that [ChildName] will be when he/she is your age? 6.419 6.529 -0.111 [0.092] [0.116] Age you expect [ChildName] to start earning money to support your household? 25.965 25.917 0.047 [0.200] [0.380] Age you expect [ChildName] to leave full-time education? 23.410 22.661 0.749 [0.377] [0.735] Age you expect [ChildName] to be financially independent of HIS/HER parents? 27.806 28.222 -0.416 [0.263] [0.319] Age you expect [ChildName] to leave this household? 28.796 28.774 0.021 [0.297] [0.365] Age you expect [ChildName] to get married and start living together with a husband/wife? 29.799 30.103 -0.304 [0.271] [0.270] Age you expect [ChildName] to have a child? 30.982 31.142 -0.161 [0.301] [0.298] Notes: The value displayed for t-tests are the differences in the means across the groups. Standard errors are clustered at community level ***, **, and * indicate significance at the 1, 5, and 10 percent critical level. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 144 ANNEX VI: DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Name Alicia Menendez Title Principal Investigator Organization NORC at the University of Chicago Evaluation Position? X Team Leader Team member Evaluation Award Number (contract or other instrument) Cooperative Agreement NoAID-OAA-A-17- 00003 USAID Project(s) Evaluated (Include project name(s), implementer name(s) and award number(s), if applicable) The Apatseni Mwayi Atsikana Aphunzire (AMAA) Evaluation, Malawi I have real or potential conflicts of interest to disclose. Yes X No If yes answered above, I disclose the following facts: Real or potential conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to: 1. Close family member who is an employee of the USAID operating unit managing the project(s) being evaluated or the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated. 2. Financial interest that is direct, or is significant though indirect, in the implementing organization(s) whose projects are being evaluated or in the outcome of the evaluation. 3. Current or previous direct or significant though indirect experience with the project(s) being evaluated, including involvement in the project design or previous iterations of the project. 4. Current or previous work experience or seeking employment with the USAID operating unit managing the evaluation or the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated. 5. Current or previous work experience with an organization that may be seen as an industry competitor with the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated. 6. Preconceived ideas toward individuals, groups, organizations, or objectives of the particular projects and organizations being evaluated that could bias the evaluation. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 145 I certify (1) that I have completed this disclosure form fully and to the best of my ability and (2) that I will update this disclosure form promptly if relevant circumstances change. If I gain access to proprietary information of other companies, then I agree to protect their information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished. Signature Date March 19, 2018 Name Gregory Lee Haugan Title Principal Research Analyst Organization NORC at the University of Chicago Evaluation Position? Team Leader X Team member Evaluation Award Number (contract or other instrument) Cooperative Agreement NoAID-OAA-A-17- 00003 USAID Project(s) Evaluated (Include project name(s), implementer name(s) and award number(s), if applicable) The Apatseni Mwayi Atsikana Aphunzire (AMAA) Evaluation, Malawi I have real or potential conflicts of interest to disclose. Yes X No If yes answered above, I disclose the following facts: Real or potential conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to: 1. Close family member who is an employee of the USAID operating unit managing the project(s) being evaluated or the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated. 2. Financial interest that is direct, or is significant though indirect, in the implementing organization(s) whose projects are being evaluated or in the outcome of the evaluation. 3. Current or previous direct or significant though indirect experience with the project(s) being evaluated, including involvement in the project design or previous iterations of the project. 4. Current or previous work experience or seeking employment with the USAID operating unit managing the evaluation or the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated. 5. Current or previous work experience with an organization that may be seen as an industry competitor with the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 146 6. Preconceived ideas toward individuals, groups, organizations, or objectives of the particular projects and organizations being evaluated that could bias the evaluation. I certify (1) that I have completed this disclosure form fully and to the best of my ability and (2) that I will update this disclosure form promptly if relevant circumstances change. If I gain access to proprietary information of other companies, then I agree to protect their information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished. Signature Date 03/19/2018 Name Zoe Grotophorst Title Principal Research Analyst Organization NORC Evaluation Position? Team Leader X Team member Evaluation Award Number (contract or other instrument) Cooperative Agreement NoAID-OAA-A-17- 00003 USAID Project(s) Evaluated (Include project name(s), implementer name(s) and award number(s), if applicable) The Apatseni Mwayi Atsikana Aphunzire (AMAA) Evaluation, Malawi I have real or potential conflicts of interest to disclose. Yes X No If yes answered above, I disclose the following facts: Real or potential conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to: 1. Close family member who is an employee of the USAID operating unit managing the project(s) being evaluated or the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated. 2. Financial interest that is direct, or is significant though indirect, in the implementing organization(s) whose projects are being evaluated or in the outcome of the evaluation. 3. Current or previous direct or significant though indirect experience with the project(s) being evaluated, including involvement in the project design or previous iterations of the project. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 147 4. Current or previous work experience or seeking employment with the USAID operating unit managing the evaluation or the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated. 5. Current or previous work experience with an organization that may be seen as an industry competitor with the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated. 6. Preconceived ideas toward individuals, groups, organizations, or objectives of the particular projects and organizations being evaluated that could bias the evaluation. I certify (1) that I have completed this disclosure form fully and to the best of my ability and (2) that I will update this disclosure form promptly if relevant circumstances change. If I gain access to proprietary information of other companies, then I agree to protect their information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished. Signature Date 03.19.2018 Name Varuni Dayaratna Title Project Manager Organization NORC at the University of Chicago Evaluation Position? Team Leader X Team member Evaluation Award Number (contract or other instrument) Cooperative Agreement NoAID-OAA-A-17- 00003 USAID Project(s) Evaluated (Include project name(s), implementer name(s) and award number(s), if applicable) The Apatseni Mwayi Atsikana Aphunzire (AMAA) Evaluation, Malawi I have real or potential conflicts of interest to disclose. Yes X No If yes answered above, I disclose the following facts: Real or potential conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to: 1. Close family member who is an employee of the USAID operating unit managing the project(s) being evaluated or the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated. PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 148 2. Financial interest that is direct, or is significant though indirect, in the implementing organization(s) whose projects are being evaluated or in the outcome of the evaluation. 3. Current or previous direct or significant though indirect experience with the project(s) being evaluated, including involvement in the project design or previous iterations of the project. 4. Current or previous work experience or seeking employment with the USAID operating unit managing the evaluation or the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated. 5. Current or previous work experience with an organization that may be seen as an industry competitor with the implementing organization(s) whose project(s) are being evaluated. 6. Preconceived ideas toward individuals, groups, organizations, or objectives of the particular projects and organizations being evaluated that could bias the evaluation. I certify (1) that I have completed this disclosure form fully and to the best of my ability and (2) that I will update this disclosure form promptly if relevant circumstances change. If I gain access to proprietary information of other companies, then I agree to protect their information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it was furnished. Signature Date March 19, 2018 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NO.: ID-OAA-M-13-00010 APATSENI MWAYI ATSIKANA APHUNZIRE AMAA BASELINE REPORT | 149 U.S. Agency for International Development 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20523