Ethics and Data Quality
Enablers
Growing Expertise in EiE Data Production: Despite ongoing capacity limitations, recent years have witnessed the recruitment of EiE data specialists in multiple countries. Positioned within Ministries of Education (MoEs) and Education Clusters, these specialists play a crucial role in overseeing and guiding data production, contributing to a surge in expertise.
Utilising Established Ethics Boards and Quality Assurance Bodies: As EiE data actors explore closer collaboration with research institutions, such as universities and science boards, there exists an opportunity to leverage existing ethics boards and quality assurance mechanisms. This collaborative effort ensures the maintenance of ethical standards and quality control throughout the EiE data value chain, enhancing accountability to affected communities.
Aligning Data Collection with Intended Aims: Linking data collection directly to intended objectives and fostering data literacy across the EiE data value chain ensures that collected data are purpose-driven. This alignment enhances the transferability and generalizability of data, instilling confidence in the produced data and fostering an environment conducive to attracting further investments.
Adapting EMIS Quality Assurance Frameworks for Crisis Settings: Some countries, as indicated by the Diagnostic Guidance and Tools developed in initiatives, are adapting their Quality Assurance Frameworks for Education Management Information Systems (EMIS) to specifically address the quality assurance needs of EiE data. This adaptation reflects a strategic response to elevate data quality in challenging contexts.
Constraints
Lack of Suitable Infrastructure, Technology, and Connectivity: Many countries face challenges due to inadequate infrastructure, technology, and connectivity, leading to incomplete or deficient datasets.
Capacity Constraints and Low Data Literacy: Low data literacy, particularly at regional, district, and school levels, poses challenges to data collection and contributes to the poor quality of data.
Vested Interests in Data Production: Multiple data producers may have vested interests, such as benefiting from school grants, impacting the trustworthiness of data.
Limited Data Protection and Accountability: Ethical guidance is often limited in crisis settings, neglecting the importance of data protection and accountability to affected communities. Partner organizations may collect data without obtaining informed consent.
Tension Between Protection Risks and Inclusion: Vulnerable teachers and learners in politically unstable contexts face additional protection risks, hindering safe data collection and inclusion into national systems.
Budget Constraints Compounded by Multiple Crises: Resource-poor contexts find it challenging to secure sufficient funding for regular and systematic EiE data collection and analysis, further exacerbated by the impact of multiple crises.
Limited Guidance on Qualitative Data: The prevalence of valuing quantitative data over qualitative data results in limited guidance and quality assurance mechanisms for qualitative EiE data, leading to less rigorous and robust data collection and analysis.