Teacher Dropout Rates
Better infrastructure Dropout
Subsidized schools Dropout
Only 20% of dropouts can be explained by data we have on schools and teachers
Teachers in Schools with + and – Learning
We interviewed teachers and principals in schools with student performance above average (+ deviants) and below average (– deviants) to compare and uncover their practices, behaviors, and strategies.
Differences Between Schools
Positive Deviants Characteristics
+ Deviant schools: smaller, tend to have fewer students & lower student-teacher ratio
+ Deviant schools: teachers with longer tenure as teachers and in the current school
+ Deviant schools: teachers attend school every day
+ Deviant schools: self-reported very high teacher dropout in the past three years
+ Deviant schools: outperform average and – deviants in areas like peer-to-peer learning and professional development.
School infrastructure & quality of food program do not seem to be the performance drivers.
Strategies of Public and Subsidized Schools vs Positive Deviants
Public schools System strategies | Positive deviants In school strategies | Subsidized schools System strategies | |
![]() | Decentralized, teacher-led NGOs programs reach some | Frequent training Apolitical | Frequent training in alliance with private universities and NGOs |
![]() | Reallocation of teachers and local young professionals in lower grades, flexible schedule | Limited flexibility, local young professionals in lower grades | No flexibility, within school reallocations, hiring and training community members |
![]() | Supervision focuses on reporting on regular attendance and implementation | Effective principals, supportive supervision, peer to peer learning | Effective principals, supportive supervision, peer to peer learning, teacher recognition |
![]() | High variation, non-monetary support to school | High engagement and responsiveness, primarily non-monetary support to school | High engagement and responsiveness, primarily in kind and monetary support to school |