SchoolsReport2011-2012

Schools and Schooling in the State of Qatar

2011-12 Report

A nnual Report on schools and schooling in the State of Qatar

i

Foreword

This annual report compendium is designed to provide those who are involved in, and others who are interested in, school education in Qatar with an array of summary information about Qatar’s schools, principals, and its students and their parents.

The compendium provides an overview of many important aspects of Qatar’s schools and is designed to provide readers with an understanding of schooling in Qatar as well as being a useful data source. The information is extensive, but indicative, in nature. It allows for the identification of what is similar as well as that which is different between the stages and types of schools operating.

This year’s edition is the eighth one in the series has been produced annually since 2005. It contains the latest information covering the 2011-12 school-year for the same aspects which were reported in the 2010-11 school-year edition.

I commend this collection to you and also take the opportunity of particularly recognising the efforts of officers of the School Evaluation Office, Data Collection & Management Office and Communications Office who contributed in many different and substantial ways to the collection, compilation and preparation of the material for this publication.

Dr. Hamda Hassan Al-SulaitiDirectorEvaluation InstituteSupreme Education CouncilQatar

iii

Table of Contents Page

Foreword i

Contents iii

Introductory and explanatory notes xvii

Schools 1

• Table (1) : Overall numbers of schools, teachers and students [by school type] • Table (2) : School enrolment practices [by school type] • Table (3) : School enrolment practices [by school stage]

Principals 3

• Table (4) : Principals’ gender • Graph (1) : principals’ gender • Table (5) : Principals’ age • Table (6) : Principals’ nationality • Graph (2) : principals’ nationality • Table (7) : Principals’ qualification levels • Graph (3) : principals’ qualification levels • Table (8) : Principals’ education-related qualifications • Table (9) : Principals’ experience in school positions • Table (10) : Principals’ English language skills • Table (11) : Principals’ current professional development

iv

Page

Teachers 7

• Table (12) : Teachers’ gender • Graph (4) : teachers’ gender • Table (13) : Teachers’ age • Table (14) : Teachers’ nationality • Graph (5) : teachers’ nationality • Table (15) : Teachers’ educational qualifications • Graph (6) : teachers’ educational qualifications • Table (16) : Teachers’ formal teaching qualifications • Table (17) : Principals’ satisfaction with teachers’ subject preparation • Table (18) : Principals’ satisfaction with the instructional quality of school’s teachers • Table (19) : Teachers’ satisfaction with prior subject preparation of students • Table (20) : Teacher teaching experience • Table (21) : Teachers’ years of teaching experience • Table (22) : Teachers’ native language • Table (23) : Teachers’ Arabic language skills • Table (24) : Teachers’ English language skills

Students 13

• Table (25) : Students’ gender • Graph (7) : students’ gender • Table (26) : Students’ nationality • Graph (8) : students’ nationality • Table (27) : Languages spoken by students • Table (28) : Languages spoken in students’ homes • Table (29) : Parents reporting of children with learning disabilities at school • Graph (9) : students with learning disabilities • Table (30) : Students receiving financial and/or resource assistance • Graph (10) : students receiving financial assis

v

Page

Parents and the households 17

• Table (31) : Students’ household size • Table (32) : Mothers’ educational qualifications • Table (33) : Fathers’ educational qualifications • Table (34) : Educational expenditures in students’ households • Graph (11) : students’ households’ educational expenditures • Table (35) : Education-related resources in student’ households

School governance structures 19

• Table (36) : Student involvement in school committees • Table (37) : Students reporting participation in school elections • Table (38) : Student participation in school decision-making [by school type] • Table (39) : Student participation in school decision-making [by school stage] • Table (40) : Parent involvement in school committees • Table (41) : Parent participation in school decision-making [by school type] • Table (42) : Parent participation in school decision-making [by school stage] • Table (43) : Community member involvement in school committees • Table (44) : Community member participation in school decision-making [by school type]

• Table (45) : Community member participation in school decision-making [by school stage] • Table (46) : School staff involvement in school committees • Graph (12) : involvement in school committees [by school type] • Graph (13) : involvement in school committees [by school stage] • Table (47) : School staff participation in school decision-making [by school type] • Table (48) : School staff participation in school decision-making [by school stage] • Table (49) : Teachers’ views on the valuing of their opinion in school decision-making

• Table (50) : Teachers’ reporting frequency of involvement in school committees and meetings

vi

Page

School leadership 25

• Table (51) : Principals’ view of their autonomy • Table (52) : Teachers’ satisfaction with school leadership • Table (53) : Teachers’ opinion as to whether the school is a well-organised place to work • Table (54) : Schools’ promotion of teacher collaboration opportunities [by school type] • Table (55) : Schools’ promotion of teacher collaboration opportunities [by school stage]

Teaching staff 27

• Table (56) : Teacher Turnover indicators • Table (57) : Principals’ views on staff turnover rates • Table (58) : Principals’ view on teacher absenteeism rates • Table (59) : Teachers’ reporting on the time spent teaching • Table (60) : Teachers’ satisfaction with the teacher salary levels at the school

Within-school relationships 29

• Table (61) : Students’ reporting of student and teacher interactions • Table (62) : Principals’ reporting of school’s administration and teachers’ teamwork • Table (63) : Teachers’ reporting of school’s administration and teachers’ teamwork • Table (64) : Principals’ view on staff-student respect at the school • Table (65) : Teachers’ views on staff-student respect at the school • Table (66) : Parents’ reporting of how well their child gets on with other students • Table (67) : Teachers’ views on principals’ support of their work • Table (68) : Teachers’ views on the value of their contribution to the school • Table (69) : Teachers’ views on the school as a workplace

vii

Page

Teacher professional support and development 33

• Table (70) : Schools’ provisions to enhance its teachers’ skills [by school type] • Table (71) : Schools’ provisions to enhance its teachers’ skills [by school stage]

• Table (72) : Teachers’ participation in recent professional practices to enhance classroom skills

• Table (73) : Teachers’ reporting of professional development time • Table (74) : Teachers’ satisfaction with the quality of professional development • Table (75) : Schools regularly evaluating their classroom teachers • Graph (14) : evaluation of classroom teachers • Table (76) : Schools’ approaches to evaluating its teachers [by school type] • Table (77) : Schools’ approaches to evaluating its teachers [by school stage] • Table (78) : Schools’ teacher performance feedback practices • Table (79) : Teachers, satisfaction with the quality of feedback received at the school

on their work

School facilities 37

• Table (80) : Ratio of students to classrooms available • Table (81) : School facilities • Graph (15) : school facilities [by school type] • Graph (16) : school facilities [by school stage] • Table (82) : School library holdings • Graph (17) : school library holdings [by school type] • Graph (18) : school library holdings [by school stage] • Table (83) : Principals’ satisfaction with the quality of library facilities • Table (84) : Teachers’ satisfaction with the quality of library facilities • Table (85) : Principals’ satisfaction with the quality of science laboratories • Table (86) : Principals’ satisfaction with the quality of computer facilities available • Table (87) : Principals’ satisfaction with the amount of space available in the school • Table (88) : Teachers’ satisfaction with the quality of classrooms • Table (89) : Principals’ satisfaction with the quality of instructional materials • Table (90) : Teachers’ opinion about the work materials provided by the school • Table (91) : Principals’ satisfaction with the condition of the school building • Table (92) : Teachers’ satisfaction with the condition of the school building

viii

Page

School services and activities 43

• Table (93) : School services provided [by school type] • Graph (19) : school services provided [by school type] • Table (94) : School services provided [by school stage] • Graph (20) : school services provided [by school stage] • Table (95) : School extracurricular activities provided [by school type] • Graph (21) : extracurricular activities [by school type] • Table (96) : School extracurricular activities provided [by school stage] • Graph (22) : extracurricular activities [by school stage] • Table (97) : Students’ views on activity range • Table (98) : Parents’ satisfaction with the extracurricular activities available • Table (99) : Principals’ satisfaction with school transportation services

Class and school structures 47

• Table (100) : Average school days in the school year [by school type] • Graph (23) : Average school days in the school year [by school type] • Table (101) : Ratio of total students to total teachers • Table (102) : Average weekly class time for all subjects • Graph (24) : weekly class time for all subjects [by school type] • Table (103) : Average weekly class time for Arabic • Graph (25) : weekly class time for Arabic [by school type] • Table (104) : Average weekly class time for English • Graph (26) : weekly class time for English [by school type] • Table (105) : Average weekly class time for Mathematics • Graph (27) : weekly class time for Mathematics [by school type] • Table (106) : Average weekly class time for Sciences • Graph (28) : weekly class time for Science [by school type] • Table (107) : Average weekly class time for Religion • Graph (29) : weekly class time for Religion [by school type] • Table (108) : Average weekly class time for Social Studies • Graph (30) : weekly class time for Social Studies [by school type] • Table (109) : Principals’ satisfaction with the amount of instructional time available • Table (110) : Teachers’ satisfaction with the amount of instructional time available

ix

Page

Provisions for students with special needs and learning difficulties 55

• Table (111) : Schools’ access for physically handicapped students• Graph (31) : access for physically handicapped students• Table (112) : Principals’ satisfaction with the school’s resources for special needs students • Table (113) : Teachers’ satisfaction with the school’s catering for special needs students• Table (114) : Schools’ general approaches to students with learning difficulties [by school type]• Table (115) : Schools’ general approaches to students with learning difficulties [by school stage]• Table (116) : Teachers’ reporting approaches to students with learning difficulties [by school type]• Table (117) : Teachers’ reporting approaches to students with learning difficulties [by school stage]• Table (118) : Principals’ satisfaction with the school’s catering for low-performing students• Table (119) : Teachers’ satisfaction with the school’s catering for low-performing students

Computers and computing 59

• Table (120) : School computers• Table (121) : Principals’ satisfaction with the school’s access to computers • Table (122) : Students’ satisfaction with computer access• Table (123) : Teachers’ satisfaction with access to computers in school• Table (124) : Principals’ reporting on their computer skills levels• Table (125) : Teachers’ reporting on their computer skills levels• Table (126) : Teachers’ reporting on their use of computers within the classroom• Table (127) : Students’ reporting on student use of computers in classes and in general• Graph (32) : students report on their use of computers in classes• Table (128) : Students’ use of the internet for school and non-school purposes• Table (129) : Students’ use of the internet at school and elsewhere

Student academic achievement - Independent schools 63

• Table (130) : Average QCEA Arabic overall scale scores• Table (131) : Percentages of students at each Standard Level in QCEA Overall Arabic• Table (132) : Average QCEA English overall scale scores• Table (133) : Percentages of students at each Standard Level in QCEA Overall English• Table (134) : Average QCEA Mathematics (Overall) and Science (Overall) scale scores• Table (135) : Percentages of students at each Standard Level in QCEA Overall

Mathematics

x

Page

• Table (136) : Percentages of students at each Standard Level in QCEA Overall Science• Table (137) : Average QCEA Islamic Studies scale scores (Overall)• Table (138) : Percentages of students at each Standard Level in QCEA Overall Islamic

Studies• Table (139) : Average QCEA Social Studies scale scores (Overall)• Table (140) : Percentages of students at each Standard Level in QCEA Overall Social Studies

Teachers’ expectations of students 67

• Table (141) : Principals’ satisfaction with teachers’ expectations of student performance• Table (142) : Students’ views of teachers’ encouragement

Teaching practices 69

• Table (143) : Schools’ use of Arabic as the language of instruction for Mathematics classes• Table (144) : Schools’ use of Arabic as the language of instruction for Science classes• Table (145) : Schools’ use of Arabic as the language of instruction for computer classes• Table (146) : Schools’ use of Arabic as the language of instruction for social science classes• Table (147) : Teachers’ description of classroom practices [by school type] • Graph (33) : teachers’ classroom practices [by school type]• Table (148) : Teachers’ description of classroom practices [by school stage]• Graph (34) : teachers’ classroom practices [by school stage]• Table (149) : Teachers’ description of nature of work assigned in classes [by school type]• Graph (35) : teachers’ assignment of work in class [by school type]• Table (150) : Teachers’ description of nature of work assigned in classes [by school stage]• Graph (36) : teachers’ assignment of work in class [by school stage]• Table (151) : Teachers’ report on the number of different textbooks used• Table (152) : Teaching/learning aids used by the teacher [by school type]• Table (153) : Teaching/learning aids used by the teacher [by school stage]• Table (154) : Students’ description of classroom practices in Arabic classes [by school type]• Table (155) : Students’ description of classroom practices in Arabic classes [by school stage]• Table (156) : Students’ description of Arabic classes in which extended work is assigned• Table (157) : Students’ description of classroom practices in English classes [by school type]• Table (158) : Students’ description of classroom practices in English classes [by school stage]• Table (159) : Students’ description of English classes in which extended work is assigned• Table (160) : Students’ description of classroom practices in Mathematics classes [by school type]• Table (161) : Students’ description of classroom practices in Mathematics classes [by school stage]

xi

Page• Table (162) : Students’ description of classroom practices in Science classes [by school type]• Table (163) : Students’ description of classroom practices in Science classes [by school stage]• Table (164) : Students’ views on how well schoolwork is understood• Table (165) : Parents’ views on the appropriateness of the difficulty of their child’s schoolwork• Table (166) : Parents’ views on provision of additional help needed by their child

Assessment practices and uses of assessment information 77

• Table (167) : Schools’ use of different assessment instruments/approaches [by school type]• Table (168) : Schools’ use of different assessment instruments/approaches [by school stage]• Table (169) : Purposes for which schools use student assessment [by school type]• Table (170) : Purposes for which schools use student assessment [by school stage] • Table (171) : Schools’ frequency of undertaking evaluations of student progress [by school type]• Graph (37) : frequency of student evaluations [by school type]• Table (172) : Schools’ frequency of undertaking evaluations of student progress [by school stage]• Graph (38) : frequency of student evaluations [by school stage]

Homework 81

• Table (173) : Teachers’ reporting assignment of homework to students• Table (174) : Parents’ reporting of amount of homework done by child• Table (175) : Students’ reporting of amount of homework done• Graph (39) : student and parent reports of amount of homework done [by school type]• Graph (40) : student and parent reports of amount of homework done [by school stage]• Table (176) : Students’ reporting of proportion of set homework completed• Graph (41) : student report on proportion of homework completed• Table (177) : Students’ reporting of parental checking of homework• Table (178) : Assignment of homework as reported by teachers, students and parents• Table (179) : Parents reporting family involvement with their children’s homework• Table (180) : Parents’ views on the value of the homework

Student attitudes 85

• Table (181) : Students’ enjoyment of Arabic studies• Table (182) : Students’ enjoyment of English studies• Table (183) : Students’ enjoyment of Mathematics studies• Table (184) : Students’ enjoyment of Science studies• Table (185) : Parents’ view on how much effort their child puts into school

xii

Page

• Table (186) : Principals’ satisfaction with the students’ motivation to learn • Table (187) : Teachers’ satisfaction with the students’ motivation to learn • Table (188) : Students’ reporting of further educational aspirations • Graph (42) : students’ further educational aspirations • Table (189) : Parents’ reporting on the further education aspirations they have for their child • Graph (43) : parents’ further educational aspirations for their children • Table (190) : Students’ satisfaction that school prepares them for the future

Student attendance and punctuality 89

• Table (191) : Parents’ reporting on student absenteeism • Table (192) : Students’ reporting of absenteeism and tardiness • Graph (44) : students’ absenteeism • Graph (45) : students’ tardiness • Table (193) : Principals’ views on students’ attendance and punctuality

Student behaviour and discipline 91

• Table (194) : Students’ views on fairness of school discipline • Table (195) : Parents’ views on school discipline • Table (196) : Teachers’ views on principal’s enforcement of behaviour policy • Table (197) : Parents’ satisfaction with how the school treats their child • Table (198) : Principals’ satisfaction with student behaviour and discipline • Table (199) : Teachers’ satisfaction with student behaviour and discipline • Table (200) : Students’ views on safety at school • Table (201) : Students’ reporting of being subject to theft or bullying • Table (202) : Students’ views on degree of students’ attention to schoolwork • Table (203) : Students’ reporting disobeying school rules • Table (204) : Students reporting school contacts parents about behaviour

Parent-School communications 95

• Table (205) : Schools’ parent reporting practices • Graph (46) : schools’ parent reporting practices [by school type] • Graph (47) : schools’ parent reporting practices [by school stage] • Table (206) : Parents’ reporting frequency of parental-school contacts • Graph (48) : frequency of parental-school contacts

xiii

Page

• Table (207) : Parents’ reporting frequency of receiving student report cards from the school • Graph (49) : parents’ frequency of receiving student reports from the school • Table (208) : Parents’ report on frequency of receipt of information from the school • Graph (50) : parents’ frequency of receiving information from the school • Table (209) : Teachers’ reporting of frequency of communicating with parents • Table (210) : Parents’ reporting on frequency of involvement in educational activities • Table (211) : Parents’ satisfaction with school’s communications

Parents’ involvement in, and interactions with, school 99

• Table (212) : Schools’ expectations of its students’ parents [by school type] • Table (213) : Schools’ expectations of its students’ parents [by school stage] • Table (214) : Principals’ views on parental involvement in their child’s education • Table (215) : Principals’ satisfaction with parental support for learning • Table (216) : Teachers’ satisfaction with parental support for learning • Table (217) : Parents’ description of frequency of involvement in aspects of school [by school type] • Graph (51) : parents’ involvement in aspects of school [by school type]

• Table (218) : Parents’ description of frequency of involvement in aspects of school [by school stage]

• Graph (52) : parents’ involvement in aspects of school [by school stage] • Table (219) : Parents’ views on their involvement in school decisions • Table (220) : Schools’ reporting of parent participation in its activities [by school type] • Table (221) : Schools’ reporting of parent participation in its activities [by school stage] • Table (222) : Principals’ view on students’ parents involvement in the school • Table (223) : Principals’ views on school’s welcoming of parents • Table (224) : Teachers’ views on school’s welcoming of parents • Table (225) : Principals’ views on teachers’ relationship with students’ parents • Table (226) : Teachers’ views on teachers’ relationship with students’ parent

xiv

Page

Aspects of client satisfaction 105

• Table (227) : Students’ satisfaction with school • Table (228) : Parents’ satisfaction with education provided by the school • Table (229) : Parents’ satisfaction with the quality of the curriculum provided by the school • Table (230) : Students’ satisfaction about their school providing a good education • Table (231) : Students’ views on how well school prepares them for work • Table (232) : Students’ views on how well school prepares them for parenthood • Table (233) : Students’ views on how well school prepares them for citizenship • Table (234) : Parents’ satisfaction with school as preparation for the future • Table (235) : Students’ pride in their school • Table (236) : Students’ views on how well they enjoy school • Table (237) : Parents’ views on how well their child enjoys school

Comparative information 2009-10 to 2011-12: selected indicators 109

• Table (238) : Teachers’ formal teaching qualifications 2009 to 2012 • Graph (53) : Teachers’ teaching qualifications [by school type] • Graph (54) : Teachers’ teaching qualifications [by school stage] • Table (239) : Principal satisfaction with the instructional quality of school’s teachers 2009 to 2012 • Graph (55) : Satisfaction with teacher quality [by school type] • Graph (56) : Satisfaction with teacher quality [by school stage] • Table (240) : Principals’ views on their autonomy 2009 to 2012 • Graph (57) : Principals’ autonomy [by school type] • Graph (58) : Principals’ autonomy [by school stage] • Table (241) : Teachers’ satisfaction with school leadership 2009 to 2012 • Graph (59) : Satisfaction with school leadership [by school type] • Graph (60) : Satisfaction with school leadership [by school stage] • Table (242) : Teachers’ views on the valuing of their opinion in school decision-making 2009 to 2012 • Graph (61) : Teachers’ decision-making involvement satisfaction [by school type] • Graph (62) : Teachers’ decision-making involvement satisfaction [by school stage] • Table (243) : Teachers’ views about the school being a well-organised place to work 2009 to 2012

xv

• Graph (63) : Satisfaction with school workplace organisation [by school type] • Graph (64) : Satisfaction with school workplace organisation [by school stage]

• Table (244) : Teacher reporting of professional development time 2009 to 2012 • Graph (65) : Teacher professional development time [by school type] • Graph (66) : Teacher professional development time [by school stage]

• Table (245) : Teachers’ views on the quality of professional development available 2009 to 2012

• Graph (67) : Satisfaction with professional development [by school type] • Graph (68) : Satisfaction with professional development [by school stage] • Table (246) : Students’ views on teachers’ encouragement 2009 to 2012 • Graph (69) : Teachers’ encouragement of students [by school type] • Graph (70) : Teachers’ encouragement of students [by school stage] • Table (247) : Students’ views on activity range 2009 to 2012 • Graph (71) : Satisfaction with schools’ activity range [by school type] • Graph (72) : Satisfaction with schools’ activity range [by school stage] • Table (248) : School computers 2009 to 2012 • Graph (73) : School computers [by school type] • Graph (74) : School computers [by school stage] • Table (249) : Students’ satisfaction with computer access 2009 to 2012 • Graph (75) : satisfaction with computer access [by school type] • Graph (76) : satisfaction with computer access [by school stage] • Table (250) : Average QCEA Arabic (Overall) scale scores 2009 to 2012 • Graph (77) : QCEA Arabic (Overall) scale scores • Table (251) : Average QCEA English (Overall) scale scores 2009 to 2012 • Graph (78) : QCEA English (Overall) scale scores • Table (252) : Average QCEA Mathematics (Overall) scale scores 2009 to 2012 • Graph (79) : QCEA Mathematics (Overall) scale scores • Table (253) : Average QCEA Science (Overall) scale scores 2009 to 2012 • Graph (80) : QCEA Science (Overall) scale scores • Table (254) : Average QCEA Islamic Studies (Overall) scale scores 2010 to 2012 • Graph (81) : QCEA Islamic Studies (Overall) scale scores • Table (255) : Student reporting of absenteeism 2009 to 2012 • Graph (82) : Student absenteeism [by school type] • Graph (83) : Student absenteeism [by school stage] • Table (256) : Parents’ satisfaction with school’s communications 2009 to 2012 • Graph (84) : Satisfaction with school communication [by school type] • Graph (85) : Satisfaction with school communication [by school stage] • Table (257) : Parents’ views on their involvement in school decisions 2009 to 2012 • Graph (86) : Satisfaction with involvement in school decisions [by school type] • Graph (87) : Satisfaction with involvement in school decisions [by school stage] • Table (258) : Parents’ views on how well the school treats their child 2009 to 2012 • Graph (88) : Parents’ views on treatment of their children [by school type] • Graph (89) : Parents’ views on treatment of their children [by school stage]

xvi

• Table (259) : Students’ satisfaction with school 2009 to 2012 • Graph (90) : Students’ satisfaction with school [by school type] • Graph (91) : Students’ satisfaction with school [by school stage]

• Table (260) : Students’ satisfaction about their school providing a good education 2009 to 2012

• Graph (92) : Students’ satisfaction school provides good education [by school type] • Graph (93) : Students’ satisfaction school provides good education [by school stage] • Table (261) : Students’ views on how well they enjoy school 2009 to 2012 • Graph (94) : Students’ enjoyment of school [by school type] • Graph (95) : Students’ enjoyment of school [by school stage] • Table (262) : Parents’ views on how well their child enjoys school 2009 to 2012 • Graph (96) : Parents’ views on students’ enjoyment of school [by school type] • Graph (97) : Parents’ views on students’ enjoyment of school [by school stage] • Table (263) : Parents’ satisfaction about the school providing a good education 2009 to 2012 • Graph (98) : parents’ satisfaction school provides good education [by school type] • Graph (99) : parents’ satisfaction school provides good education [by school stage]

xvii

Introductory and explanatory notes

The information is presented in a series of tables and displays that are intended to be essentially self-explanatory and self-contained. Some shaping of the data has been undertaken in order to simplify and standardise the presentation and facilitate understanding. As such, readers are urged to be careful in drawing any conclusions and also to refer the notes accompanying the tables to better understand the table entries.

Apart from the first table, the tabulations and the selected pictorial presentations typically provide separate information based on the three stages of schooling (primary, preparatory and secondary) and on four school types (referred to as Independent, Private Arabic, and International) as well as for schools of these types overall. For ease of presentation the abbreviations Ind, PA, and Int have been used for the four types respectively within the graphical displays.

The first table provides data on the numbers and percentages of schools, teachers, and students in Qatar as a in terms of five school types (viz the three types indicated above plus the Community and the Other categories. The rest of the tables do not include information from the Community schools and no detailed data surveys were carried out in these schools. However, data from the Other schools (ie Qatar Leadership Academy and Aspire Academy for Sports Excellence) were collected and has been incorporated for presentation purposes within the Independent schools’ data.

Care should be taken particularly when examining the data presented by school stage as there are many situations where respondents, and their information, relate to more than one stage. In such instances the respondents’ data contributes to all of the stages to which they pertain. Thus, for example, teachers who work in both primary and preparatory schooling stages will be reported separately in each of the primary and the preparatory categories. For this reason, the information presented by school stage may not always seem to be consistent with the totals or overall figures as it may well be based on multiply-allocated cases and/or responses

The main sources for information selected for presentation in this report are listed and briefly outlined in the following table.

xviii

Main data sources: 2011-12 Schools Annual ReportData Source Date Collected Collection Method

DCM School Enumeration October to December 2011 School records

DCM School Profile October to December 2011 School visit

QCSS School Questionnaire December 2011 Completed electronically through the web

QCSS Principal Questionnaire December 2011 Completed electronically through the web

QCSS Parent Questionnaire March to April 2012 Paper surveys completed at home

QCSS Student Questionnaire March to April 2012 Paper surveys completed in classroom

QCSS Teacher Questionnaire March to April 2012 Completed electronically through the web

QCEA Student Assessment May to June 2012 Standardized tests administered in classroom

DCM Data Collection and Management; QCSS Qatar Comprehensive School Surveys; QCEA Qatar Comprehensive Educational Assessment.

The bulk of these data covers the 2011-12 school-year and has been independently compiled by the Evaluation Institute based on a variety of data sources. The data are presented essentially as provided by the various respondents; they represent what the respondents think, feel and report and have not been filtered and/or verified. In one sense verification occurs through triangulation: by juxtaposing the various perspectives on the same concept from different groups (eg parents, principals and teachers have each independently provided their views about what was transpiring with respect to parent-school involvement). Similarly, it should also be noted that some of the descriptive information presented are simply signifying the feature’s purported existence (as reported by the school itself) and no judgement has been made about the veracity or indeed the actual quality or fitness-for-purpose of the feature.

Examining the data sources table above, it can be seen that the information comes from a range of approaches and data sources ensuring that the description of the schools involved are not dependent upon a single viewpoint, and that the information is broad and robust. The student questionnaires were only administered to students in Grades 4 to 12 inclusive so any data which are reported as being sourced from ‘primary stage students’ is, in fact, only from those students in Grades 4 to 6 inclusive.

xix

It is also important to note, as indicated, that the data are sourced from various times in the 2011-12 school-year and thus are a little dated and do not depict a single fixed situation nor necessarily the present situation with respect to schools. Schools are dynamic entities with their resources, students, staff and operations undergoing change. However, whilst not necessarily currently accurate, these data are usefully indicative and over time, together with up-to-date schools information serves to inform conversations and considerations about schooling in Qatar. Whilst not definitive, collectively they provide a rich depiction of Qatar’s school education contexts.

It should be noted that, as most data have been presented in rounded form, the individual component percentages will not always sum to 100%. In addition, there will be occasions where the individual components sum to less than 100% with this occurring where not all response categories for a particular area were chosen for reporting within the tables. In addition, there will be instances where the data genuinely exist, but they are shown as 0% or 0 in the table because the actual values are so small that rounding has reduced the presentation figure to zero.

This is the eighth report of this nature; the inaugural report presented data from the 2009-12 school-year. This current report contains the same tables and displays as those in last year’s edition. However, prior to that, whereas the information presented is similar to that previously presented, some minor changes in content or presentation have occurred (particularly when compared to the inaugural 2004-05 report). These differences have arisen as a consequence of refinements to data collection instruments and/or variations in data availability. The overall pervading similarity of presentation allows interested readers to compare the contents across the five reports to gain an understanding of the broad changes that may have occurred over time.

The report also contains a number of tables, which have been compiled and displays which have been created on selected aspects, which present the information over the seven (or occasionally less) years in which the data were available. These selected aspects have been chosen for their interest and relevance as useful indicators of effective schools and schooling They have been presented in order to facilitate comparison of these specific key aspects and to help identify potential trends.

Schools and Schooling in the State of Qatar 2011-12 Report

1

Schools

Table (1): Overall numbers of all schools, teachers and students in Qatar [by school type]

Average number students

per school

Average number of teachers

per school

Students Teachers Schools

Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Number

501 71 45% 89200 62% 12358 60% 178 Independent

Typ

e

347 26 3% 6597 2% 492 6% 19 Private Arabic998 71 39% 76826 27% 5433 26% 77 International 983 67 12% 23584 8% 1613 8% 24 Communities

658 68 100% 196207 100% 19896 100% 298 All Schools

Table (2): School enrolment practices [by school type]

Frequency of use of selected criteria in determining students’ enrolment at the school

Independent Private Arabic

International All

Schools

Residence in a particular area 2.8 2.0 1.5 2.3 Student’s gender 2.9 1.9 1.3 2.3 Student’s academic performance record 1.7 2.0 2.3 1.9 Passing an entrance test 1.3 1.8 2.4 1.7 Student requires a special program 2.4 1.9 2.2 2.3 Student has siblings enrolled at the school 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.2 Student’s nationality 1.8 1.2 1.2 1.6 Student’s religion 1.5 1.6 1.1 1.4 Student’s behavioural record 1.7 2.0 2.4 1.9 Parent’s ability to pay 1.5 2.0 1.8 1.7 Availability of space at the school 2.9 2.7 2.8 2.8 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.6 indicating ‘never’; 1.7 to 2.3 indicating ‘sometimes’; and, 2.4 to 3.0 indicating ‘always’.

Sch

oo

ls


2

Table (3):School enrolment practices [by school stage] Frequency of use of selected criteria in

determining students’ enrolment at the school Primary Preparatory Secondary

All Schools

Residence in a particular area 2.2 1.9 1.9 2.3 Student’s gender 2.1 1.8 1.8 2.3 Student’s academic performance record 1.9 2.1 2.1 1.9 Passing an entrance test 1.8 2.0 2.0 1.7 Student requires a special program 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.3 Student has siblings enrolled at the school 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 Student’s nationality 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.6 Student’s religion 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.4 Student’s behavioural record 2.0 2.2 2.2 1.9 Parent’s ability to pay 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.7 Availability of space at the school 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.8

The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.6 indicating ‘never’; 1.7 to 2.3 indicating ‘sometimes’; and, 2.4 to 3.0 indicating ‘always’.


3

Principals

Table (4): Principals’ gender [by school type and school stage] Percentage

Male Percentage

Female T

ype

Independent 32% 68% Private Arabic 16% 84% International 36% 64%

Sta

ge Primary 25% 75%

Preparatory 37% 63% Secondary 37% 63%

All Schools 31% 69%

Graph (1): Principal’s gender [by school type and school stage]

Table (5): Principals’ age [by school type and school stage]

Age in years Average

Age

Typ

e

Independent 43.7 Private Arabic 50.9 International 48.6

Sta

ge Primary 46.4

Preparatory 47.9 Secondary 47.7

All Schools 46.1

Male Female

Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Male Female

Primary Preparatory Secondary

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Pri

nci

pa

ls


4

Table (6): Principals’ nationality [by school type and school stage]

Percentage Qatari

Percentage Other Arab

Percentage Non-Arab

Typ

e Independent 99% 1% 0% Private Arabic 14% 84% 2% International 8% 29% 64%

Sta

ge Primary 50% 25% 25%

Preparatory 34% 33% 33% Secondary 33% 33% 34%

All Schools 61% 20% 20%

Graph (2): Principals' nationality [by school type and school stage]

Table (7): Principals’ qualification levels [by school type and school stage]

Highest level of education completed

Percentage Below aBachelor’s Degree

Percentage Bachelor’s

Degree

Percentage Above aBachelor’s Degree

Typ

e

Independent 3% 75% 23% Private Arabic 42% 40% 19% International 13% 27% 60%

Sta




Qatari Other Arabic Non-Arabic

Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%



100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


5

Graph (3): Principals' qualification levels [by school type and school stage]

Table (8): Principals' qualification levels [by school type and school stage] Proportions of principals with

education-related qualifications Percentage With Formal Teaching Qualifications

Percentage With Formal SchoolLeadership Qualifications

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 78% 53%


All Schools 73% 54%

Table (9): Principals’ experience in school positions [by school type and school stage]

Average years in school positions

As a Principal/Deputyin Present School

As Principal/Deputyin Any School

As a Teacher in Any School

Typ

e

Independent 4.2 6.8 10.2 Private Arabic 12.0 12.9 9.3 International 4.8 11.7 13.6

Sta

ge Primary 5.4 9.1 11.5

Preparatory 6.3 7.6 9.5 Secondary 6.4 11.0 11.4

All Schools 5.3 9.1 11.2

Below Bachelordegree

Bachelor degree Above Bachelordegree

Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%




100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


6

Table (10): Principal self-rating: English language skills [by school type and school stage]

“Level of language skills” Listening Speaking Reading Writing

Typ

e

Independent 3.8 3.5 3.6 3.4 Private Arabic 3.3 3.2 3.4 3.3 International 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.6

Sta

ge Primary 4.1 3.9 4.0 3.9

Preparatory 4.1 4.0 4.1 4.0 Secondary 4.2 4.0 4.1 4.0

All Schools 4.0 3.8 3.9 3.7 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘very low’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘low’; 2.6 to 3.3 indicating ‘moderate’; 3.4 to 4.1 indicating ‘good’; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicating ‘excellent’.

Table (11): Principals’ current professional development [by school type and school stage]

Principals who undertook professional development in the previous year

Percentage of Principals

Typ

e

Independent 93% Private Arabic 40% International 68%

Sta

ge Primary 75%

Preparatory 67% Secondary 69%

All Schools 79%


7

Teachers Table (12): Teachers’ gender [by school type and school stage]

Percentage Male

Percentage Female

Typ

e Independent 28% 72% Private Arabic 47% 53% International 31% 69%

Sta

ge Primary 18% 82%


All Schools 30% 70% Graph (4): Teachers' gender [by school type and school stage] Table (13): Teachers’ age [by school type and school stage]

Age in years Average

Age

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 34.7


All Schools 35.1

Male Female

Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Male Female


100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Te

ach

ers


8

Table (14): Teachers’ nationality [by school type and school stage]

Percentage Qatari


Percentage Non-Arab

Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 21% 60% 20% Graph (5): Teachers' nationality Table (15): Teachers’ educational qualifications [by school type and school stage]



Percentage Bachelor’s Degree

Percentage Above a Bachelor’s Degree

Typ

e


Sta





Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%



100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


9

Graph (6): Teachers' qualification levels [by school type and school stage] Table (16): Teachers’ formal teaching qualifications [by school type and school stage]

Percentage of teachers with formal teaching qualifications

Percentage of Teachers

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 71%


All Schools 70%

Table (17): Principal opinion: satisfaction with teachers subject preparation [by school type

and school stage]

“The subject preparation of the school’s teachers”

Percentage Satisfied

Percentage Dissatisfied

Average for Overall Level of

Satisfaction

Typ

e

Independent 94% 2% 4.4 Private Arabic 95% 2% 4.4 International 97% 0% 4.6

Sta

ge Primary 96% 1% 4.5

Preparatory 96% 0% 4.5 Secondary 97% 1% 4.5

All Schools 95% 1% 4.4 The percentage satisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’; the percentage dissatisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’; and, the percentage indicatingthey were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied are not represented in the table. For overall level of satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates satisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.



Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%Below Bachelor

degreeBachelor degree Above Bachelor

degree


100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


10

Table (18): Principal opinion: satisfaction with instructional quality of school’s teachers [by

school type and school stage]

“The instructional skills and abilities of the school’s teachers”




Satisfaction

Typ

e


Sta




Table (19): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with prior subject preparation of students [by school

type and school stage]

“The prior subject preparation of the students you have”




Satisfaction

Typ

e


Sta




Table (20): Teachers’ teaching experience [by school type and school stage]

Teachers who are teaching a course or subject for the first time

Percentage of Teachers

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 14%


All Schools 11%


11

Table (21): Teachers’ years of teaching experience [by school type and school stage]

Average Years of Teaching

Experience

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 10.7


All Schools 11.7 Table (22): Teachers’ native language [by school type and school stage]

Native language of teachers Percentage ArabicLanguage

Percentage EnglishLanguage

Percentage Other Language

Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 83% 11% 6% Table (23): Teacher self-rating: Arabic language skills [by school type and school stage]


Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.0


All Schools 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.3 The 4.8averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘very low’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘low’; 2.6 to 3.3 indicating ‘moderate’; 3.4 to 4.1 indicating ‘good’; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicating ‘excellent’.


12

Table (24): Teacher self-rating: English language skills [by school type and school stage]


Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 4.0 3.9 4.0 3.9


All Schools 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.9 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘very low’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘low’; 2.6 to 3.3indicating ‘moderate’; 3.4 to 4.1 indicating ‘good’; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicating ‘excellent’.


13

Students Table (25): Students’ gender [by school type and school stage]

Percentage Male

Percentage Female

Typ

e Independent %44 %56 Private Arabic %58 %42 International %52 %47

Sta

ge Primary %49 %51

Preparatory %49 %51 Secondary %45 %55

All Schools %47 %53 Graph (7): Students' gender [by school type and school stage] Table (26):Students’ nationality [by school type and school stage]

Percentage Qatari


Percentage Non-Arab

Typ

e


Sta




Male Female

Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Male Female


100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Stu

de

nts


14

Graph (8): Students' nationality [by school type and school stage] Table (27): Student report: Languages spoken by students [by school type and school stage]

Main languages which students report they can speak

PercentageArabic

Percentage English

Percentage Other

Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 89% 9% 2% Table (28): Student report: Languages spoken in students’ homes [by school type and school

stage] Main languages reported by students as

being spoken at their homePercentage

Arabic Percentage

English Percentage

Other

Typ

e


Sta





Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%



100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


15

Table (29): Parent report: children with learning disabilities at school [by school type and

school stage] Students with learning disabilities or

handicapping conditions Percentage of Students

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 1%


All Schools 1%

Graph (9): Students' with learning disabilities [by school type and school stage] Table (30): Students receiving school financial and/or resource assistance [by school type and

school stage] Students provided financial and/or resource

assistance by their school Percentage of Students

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 4%


All Schools 4%

Students with disabilities

Ind PA Int

5%

4%

3%

2%

1%

0%

Students with disabilities


5%

4%

3%

2%

1%

0%


16

Graph (10): Students' receiving school financial assistance [by school type and school stage]

Students receiving assistance

Ind PA Int

20%

16%

12%

8%

4%

0%

Students receiving assistance


20%

16%

12%

8%

4%

0%


17

Parents and the households Table (31): Students’ household size [by school type and school stage]

Average number of family members

in students’ households T

ype


Sta

ge Primary 7.7


All Schools 8.0 Table (32): Mothers’ educational qualifications





Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 62% 34% 4% Table (33): Fathers’ educational qualifications





Typ

e


Sta




Pa

ren

ts a

nd

th

e h

ou

seh

old

s


18

Table (34): Educational expenditure in students’ households [by school type and school stage]

Average monthly household expenditure on

educational related matters (in Qatari Riyals)

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 11594.6


All Schools 10207.8 These averages have been computed using weighted appropriately interpolated values for the responsecategories in order to obtain indicative estimates of the actual figures.

Graph (11): Monthly household educational expenditure [by school type and school stage] Table (35): Education-related resources in students’ households [by school type and school

stage] Percentage of students’ households with education-related resources

Dedicated Student Study Area(s)

Computer(s) Internet Access Study Tutor(s)

Typ

e

Independent 83% 89% 87% 27% Private Arabic 86% 94% 91% 27% International 91% 97% 97% 31%

Sta

ge Primary 84% 90% 89% 25%

Preparatory 87% 95% 93% 28% Secondary 89% 95% 94% 34%

All Schools 85% 91% 89% 27%

Average monthly expenditure

Ind PA Int

25000QR

20000 QR

15000 QR

1000QR

5000 QR

0QR

Average monthly expenditure


25000QR

20000QR

15000QR

10000QR

5000QR

0QR


19

School governance structures Table (36): Principal report: student involvement in official school committees, groups or

councils [by school type and school stage] Percentage of schools in which students are

involved in official committees, groups or councilsPercentage in which students

give advice

Percentage in which students participate in decision-

making

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 63% 46%


All Schools 71% 54% Table (37): Student report: participation in school elections [by school type and school stage]

“Percentage of students reporting having voted or run for office in elections at school”

Percentage of Students

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 42%


All Schools 32%

Table (38): Principal report: policy matters on which students participate [by school type]

Percentage of schools in which students have the right to participate in decisions about the

following school policy matters Independent

Private Arabic

International All

Schools

School planning policy 45% 21% 43% 43% School financial policy 10% 7% 7% 9% School curriculum policy 36% 21% 41% 36% School activities policy 94% 100% 79% 92% Teacher hiring and/or deployment policy 8% 21% 11% 10% Teacher professional development policy 15% 36% 14% 17% Policy on student enrolment at the school 14% 29% 11% 14% Student discipline policy 88% 79% 69% 84% Student evaluation policy 38% 64% 36% 40% Parent’s communications policy 80% 79% 39% 74% Community relations policy 80% 64% 45% 73%

Sch

oo

l g

ove

rna

nce

str

uct

ure

s


20

Table (39): Principal report: policy matters on which students participate [by school stage]

Percentage of schools in which students have the right to participate in decisions about the

following school policy matters Primary Preparatory Secondary

All Schools


Table (40): Principal report: parental involvement in official school committees, groups or councils [by school type and school stage]

Percentage of schools in which parents are involved in official committees, groups or councils

Percentage in which parents give advice

Percentage in which parents participate in decision-

making

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 70% 55%


All Schools 75% 61%

Table (41): Principal report: policy matters on which parents participate [by school type]

Percentage of schools in which parents have the right to participate in decisions about the

following school policy matters Independent

Private Arabic

International All

Schools



21

Table (42): Principal report: policy matters on which parents participate [by school stage]

Percentage of schools in which parents have the right to participate in decisions about the


All Schools


Table (43): Principal report: community involvement in official school committees, groups or

councils [by school type and school stage]

Percentage of schools in which community representatives are involved in official committees,

groups or councils

Percentage in which community representatives

give advice

Percentage in which community representatives

participate in decision-making

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 57% 49%


All Schools 64% 57% Table (44): Principal report: policy matters on which the community participate [by school

type]

Percentage of schools in which community members have the right to participate in decisions

about the following school policy matters Independent

Private Arabic

International All

Schools



22

Table (45): Principal report: policy matters on which the community participate [by school stage]

Percentage of schools in which community members have the right to participate in decisions

about the following school policy matters Primary Preparatory Secondary

All Schools


Table (46): Principal report: school staff involvement in official school committees, groups or

councils [by school type and school stage]

Percentage of schools in which school staff are involved in official committees, groups or councils

Percentage in which school staff give advice

Percentage in which school staff participate in decision-

making

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 85% 75%


All Schools 87% 79%

Graph (12): Proportions of schools in which various groups are involved in school decision-making committees [by school type]

Students Parents School staff Community members

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


23

Graph (13): Proportions of schools in which various groups are involved in school decision-

making committees [by school stage] Table (47): Principal report: policy matters on which school staff participate [by school type]

Percentage of schools in which school staff have the right to participate in decisions about

the following school policy matters Independent

Private Arabic

International All

Schools


Students Parents School staff Community members


100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


24

Table (48): Principal report: policy matters on which school staff participate [by school stage]

Percentage of schools in which school staff have the right to participate in decisions about the


All Schools


Table (49): Teacher opinion: the valuing of their opinion in school decision-making [by school type and school stage]

“My opinion matters in school decision-making”

Percentage Agreeing

Percentage Disagreeing


Agreement

Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 55% 19% 3.5 The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeing comprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view are not represented in the table. For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement

Table (50): Teacher report: frequency of involvement in school committees and meetings [by school type and school stage]

Frequency in a year with which teachers have been involved

Average for School-wide Staff Meetings

Average for Grade or Department Meetings

Average for School Committees

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 7.3 8.2 4.0


All Schools 7.4 8.5 4.2 These averages have been computed using weighted appropriately interpolated values for the response categories in order to obtain indicative estimates of the actual figures.


25

School leadership

Table (51): Principal opinion: their autonomy [by school type and school stage]

“My being allowed to change the things at the school that need changing”

Percentage Agreeing



Agreement

Typ

e


Sta


Preparatory 91% 2% 4.5

Secondary 91% 1% 4.5


Table (52): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with school leadership [by school type and school stage]

“The quality of the school’s leadership”



Average for Overall Level of Satisfaction

Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 78% 10% 4.1 The percentage satisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’; the percentage dissatisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’; and, the percentage indicating they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied are not represented in the table. For overall level of satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates satisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.

Table (53): Teacher opinion: whether the school is a well-organised place to work [by school type and school stage]

“The school is a well-organised place to work”

Percentage Agreeing


Average for Overall Level of Agreement

Typ

e


Sta




Sch

oo

l le

ad

ers

hip


26

Table (54): Schools’ promotion of teacher collaboration opportunities [by school type] Percentages of schools reporting having selected

opportunities for teacher collaboration Independent

Private Arabic

International All

Schools

Regularly scheduled whole staff meetings 99% 88% 99% 98% Regular subject/grade level staff meetings 99% 83% 96% 96% School instructional issue committees 95% 88% 80% 90% School policy-making committees 85% 76% 62% 78%

Table (55): Schools’ promotion of teacher collaboration opportunities [by school stage]

Percentages of schools reporting having selected opportunities for teacher collaboration

Primary Preparatory Secondary All

Schools

Regularly scheduled whole staff meetings 97% 97% 97% 98% Regular subject/grade level staff meetings 95% 94% 94% 96% School instructional issue committees 88% 86% 87% 90% School policy-making committees 72% 73% 75% 78%


27

Teaching staff

Table (56): Teacher turnover indicators [by school type and school stage] Average proportions of schools’ teaching staff

changes at the beginning of the school year Percentages of Teachers

New to the School

Percentages of Teachers Who Left

the School

Percentages of Total Changes to School’s Teaching Numbers

Typ

e


Sta




Table (57): Principal opinion: satisfaction with the staff turnover rates [by school type and

school stage]

“The frequency of staff changes for the school”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (58): Principal opinion: satisfaction with teacher absenteeism rates [by school type and

school stage]

“The frequency of teacher absences from the school”




Typ

e


Sta




Te

ach

ing

sta

ff


28

Table (59): Teacher report: time spent on teaching [by school type and school stage]

Average amount of time (in hours) spent as reported by teachers

Average Number of Hours a Week Classroom Teaching

Average Number of Hours a Week - All Teaching Activities

Typ

e

Independent 13.2 36.8 Private Arabic 17.5 32.0 International 21.2 42.1

Sta

ge Primary 15.9 36.9

Preparatory 16.9 39.4 Secondary 17.2 40.4

All Schools 15.1 37.7 Table (60): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with teacher salary levels at the school [by school


“The teacher salary levels at this school”




Typ

e

Private Arabic 52% 37% 3.2 Independent 18% 73% 2.0 International 38% 41% 2.9

Sta





29

Within-school relationships Table (61): Student opinion: student and teacher interactions [by school type and school stage]

“In my school teachers and students get along well together”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 63% 17% 3.6 The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeing comprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view are not represented in thetable. For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement

Table (62): Principal opinion: school’s administration and teachers teamwork [by school type and school stage]

“The school’s administration and teachers work as a team”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 98% 0% 4.7 The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeing comprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view are not represented in the table. For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates aneutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement

Table (63): Teacher opinion: school’s administration and teachers teamwork [by school type and school stage]

“The school’s administration and teachers work as a team”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Wit

hin

-sch

oo

l re

lati

on

ship

s


30

Table (64): Principal opinion: staff-student respect at the school [by school type and school stage]

“The school’s staff and students respect each other”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta


Preparatory 99% 0% 4.7

Secondary 99% 0% 4.7


Table (65): Teacher opinion: staff-student respect at the school [by school type and school stage]

“The school’s staff and students respect each other”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Table (66): Parent opinion: how well their child gets on with other students [by school type

and school stage]

“My child gets along well with other students”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 90% 3% 4.3

The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeing comprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view are not represented in the table. For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement.


31

Table (67): Teacher opinion: principals’ support of their work [by school type and school stage]

“The school principal helps the school staff and teachers in their

work”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 83% 7% 4.2 The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeing comprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view are not represented in thetable. For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement.

Table (68): Teacher opinion: the value of their contribution to the school [by school type and

school stage]

“My contribution to the school is valued”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Table (69): Teacher opinion: school as a workplace [by school type and school stage]

“This school is a good place to work” Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta





32


33

Teacher professional support and development Table (70): Schools’ provisions to enhance its teachers’ skills [by school type]

Percentages of schools providing selected activities to enhance the skills of its classroom teachers

IndependentPrivate Arabic

International All

Schools

Offering seminars on instructional methods 95% 56% 86% 87% Offering training with teachers from other schools 89% 39% 39% 68% Assigning mentors to its teachers 65% 54% 82% 68% Providing individualised feedback 100% 93% 98% 98% Organising observation of experienced teachers 100% 93% 90% 96%

Table (71): Schools’ provisions to enhance its teachers’ skills [by school stage] Percentages of schools providing selected activities to

enhance the skills of its classroom teachers Primary Preparatory Secondary

All Schools

Offering seminars on instructional methods 84% 83% 83% 87% Offering training with teachers from other schools 62% 53% 53% 68% Assigning mentors to its teachers 69% 70% 73% 68% Providing individualised feedback 98% 97% 97% 98% Organising observation of experienced teachers 95% 94% 94% 96% Table (72): Teacher report: participation in professional practices to enhance classroom skills

[by school type and school stage] Frequency with which

teachers have engaged in the selected activities

Working with a Mentor

Observing an Experienced

Teacher

Being observed by a colleague

Being observed by an experienced

teacher

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 2.9 2.9 3.0 3.0


All Schools 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.1 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘never’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘rarely’; 2.6 to 3.2 indicating ‘sometimes’; and, 3.3 to 4.0 indicating ‘often’.

Te

ach

er

pro

fess

ion

al

sup

po

rt a

nd

de

velo

pm

en

t


34

Table (73): Teacher report: professional development time [by school type and school stage]

Time (hours) spent in year on professional development

Average Time Spent

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 43.6


All Schools 49.2 These averages have been computed using weighted appropriately interpolated values for the response categories in order to obtain indicative estimates of theactual figures.

Table (74): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with the quality of professional development

[by school type and school stage]

“The quality of the professional development available in this school”




Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 77% 11% 4.0 The percentage satisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’; the percentage dissatisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’; and, the percentage indicatingthey were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied are not represented in the table. For overall level of satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicatessatisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.

Table (75): Schools regularly evaluating their classroom teachers

[by school type and school stage] Percentage of schools with some form of classroom

teachers’ performance evaluation type Percentage of Schools

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 92%


All Schools 92%


35

Graph (14): Schools with teacher performance review [by school type and school stage] Table (76): Schools’ approaches to evaluating its teachers [by school type]

Percentages of schools using selected approaches to evaluating its teachers


International All

Schools

Administrator observes teachers in class 100% 100% 100% 100% Supervisor observes teachers in class 100% 80% 87% 94% Person external to school observes teachers 96% 17% 28% 66% Students’ test results reviewed 93% 61% 81% 85% Teachers’ lesson plans reviewed 99% 100% 99% 99% Teacher self-evaluation 97% 88% 85% 92% Utilises parent and student judgements 98% 93% 96% 97%

Table (77): Schools’ approaches to evaluating its teachers [by school stage]

Percentages of schools using selected approaches to evaluating its teachers


Schools

Administrator observes teachers in class 100% 100% 100% 100% Supervisor observes teachers in class 92% 89% 89% 94% Person external to school observes teachers 58% 44% 44% 66% Students’ test results reviewed 82% 81% 81% 85% Teachers’ lesson plans reviewed 99% 99% 99% 99% Teacher self-evaluation 92% 88% 88% 92% Utilises parent and student judgements 97% 96% 96% 97%

Schools regularly reviewing its teachers

Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Schools regularly reviewing its teachers


100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


36

Table (78): Schools’ teacher performance feedback practices [by school type and school stage]

Percentages of schools using selected approaches to provide teacher

feedback

Individual Written Evaluation Report

Individual Oral Feedback

Typ

e Independent 100% 88% Private Arabic 80% 88% International 82% 93%

Sta

ge Primary 90% 90%


All Schools 92% 89% Table (79): Teacher opinion: quality of feedback received at the school on their work


“I receive helpful feedback on my work at this school”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta





37

School facilities Table (80): Ratio of students to classrooms available [by school type and school stage]

Average of schools’ ratios of students to classrooms available

Average Numbers of Students per Available Classrooms

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 20.2


All Schools 21.3 Table (81): School facilities [by school type and school stage] Average numbers of various

facilities Mosques Libraries Auditoria

Science Labs

Computer Labs

LanguageLabs

Gymnasia

Typ

e

Independent 0.3 1.0 1.2 1.9 1.7 0.4 1.0 Private Arabic 0.2 0.7 0.3 0.6 0.7 0.2 0.5 International 0.5 1.2 1.0 1.9 1.7 0.7 1.6

Sta

ge Primary 0.3 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.4 0.5 1.1

Preparatory 0.4 1.0 0.9 1.8 1.5 0.6 1.2 Secondary 0.4 1.0 0.9 1.9 1.5 0.6 1.2

All Schools 0.3 1.0 1.0 1.8 1.6 0.5 1.1

Graph (15): Schools' average numbers of various selected facilities [by school type]

Mosques Libraries Auditoria Science labs Computer labsLanguage labs Gymnasia

Ind PA Int

3.0

2.4

1.8

1.2

0.6

0

Sch

oo

l fa

cili

tie

s


38

Graph (16): Schools' average numbers of various selected facilities [by school stage] Table (82): School library holdings [by school type and school stage]

Average Number of Books in the

School Library Average Number of School Library Books per Student

Typ

e

Independent 4878 13.1 Private Arabic 766 2.8 International 7553 13.7

Sta

ge Primary 5136 12.5

Preparatory 5509 12.1 Secondary 5267 10.8

All Schools 5163 12.0

Graph (17): Numbers of school library books [by school type and school stage]

Mosques Libraries Auditoria Science labs Computer labsLanguage labs Gymnasia


3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1

0.5

0

Average number of library books

Ind PA Int

10000

7500

5000

2500

0

Average number of library books


10000

7500

5000

2500

0


39

Graph (18): Numbers of school library books per student [by school type and school stage]

Table (83): Principal opinion: satisfaction with the quality of library facilities [by school type and school stage]

“The quality of the school’s library” Percentage

Satisfied Percentage Dissatisfied


Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 88% 5% 4.3 The percentage satisfied comprises respondents who indicated they re ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’; the percentage dissatisfiedcomprises respondents who indicated they were ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’; and, the percentage indicating they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied are not represented in the table. For overall level of satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates satisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.

Table (84): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with the quality of library facilities [by school type and school stage]

“The quality of the school’s library” Percentage



Typ

e


Sta




Average number per student

Ind PA Int

20

16

12

8

4

0

Average number per student


20

16

12

8

4

0


40

Table (85): Principal opinion: satisfaction with the quality of science laboratories [by school type and school stage]

“The quality of the school’s science laboratories”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (86): Principal opinion: satisfaction with the quality of computer facilities available [by school type and school stage]

“The quality of computer facilities available”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (87): Principal opinion: satisfaction with the amount of space available in the school [by school type and school stage]

“The amount of space available for the school’s activities”




Typ

e


Sta





41

Table (88): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with the quality of classrooms [by school type and school stage]

“The quality of classroom space available for your classes”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (89): Principal opinion: satisfaction with the quality of instructional materials [by school type and school stage]

“The quality and availability of textbooks and instructional materials”




Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 94% 3% 4.5 The percentage satisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’; the percentage dissatisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’; and, the percentage indicating they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied are not represented in the table. For overall level of satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicatessatisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.

Table (90): Teacher opinion: provision of the materials necessary to do their work [by school type and school stage]

“This school provides me with the necessary materials to do my work”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 80% 9% 4.1 The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeing comprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view are not represented in the table.For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates aneutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement


42

Table (91): Principal opinion: satisfaction with the condition of the school building


“The condition of the school’s buildings”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (92): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with the condition of the school building


“The condition of the school’s buildings”




Typ

e


Sta





43

School services and activities Table (93): School services provided [by school type]

Percentages of schools with selected services available for students


International All

Schools

Medical services 98% 88% 90% 95% School transport services 98% 95% 84% 93% Canteen or food services 88% 69% 52% 75% Remedial services 73% 49% 62% 67% Student charity or financial assistance 81% 50% 28% 61% Personal counselling services 97% 95% 90% 95% Vocational counselling services 93% 60% 73% 83% Educational counselling services 93% 80% 92% 92%

Graph (19): Proportions of schools providing various selected services [by school type] Table (94): School services provided [by school stage]

Percentages of schools with selected services available for students


Schools

Medical services 93% 92% 92% 95% School transport services 92% 91% 90% 93% Canteen or food services 68% 68% 67% 75% Remedial services 60% 63% 65% 67% Student charity or financial assistance 52% 48% 51% 61% Personal counselling services 94% 93% 94% 95% Vocational counselling services 71% 75% 83% 83% Educational counselling services 88% 89% 92% 92%

Medical Transport Canteen/food Remedial Studentcharity

Personalcounselling

Vocationalcounselling

Educationalcounselling

Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Sch

oo

l se

rvic

es

an

d a

ctiv

itie

s


44

Graph (20): Proportions of schools providing various selected services [by school stage] School (95): School extra-curricular activities provided [by school type]

Percentages of schools providing selected extra-curricular activities


International All

Schools

Sports teams 84% 49% 75% 77% Arts (including theatre and music) 70% 39% 66% 64% Media club (including school newspaper) 62% 22% 45% 52% Academic club (including debating) 74% 27% 57% 63% Boy or girl scouts 53% 20% 16% 38% Community service or environment groups 71% 29% 49% 59% Student council 76% 39% 59% 66% Religious groups 74% 61% 53% 66%

Graph (21): Proportions of schools offering various selected extra-curricular activities [by

school type]

Medical Transport Canteen/food Remedial Studentcharity

Personalcounselling

Vocationalcounselling

Educationalcounselling


100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Sports teams Performing &fine arts

Media Club Academic club Scouts Communityservice

Studentcouncil

Religiousgroups

Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


45

Table (96): School extra-curricular activities provided [by school stage] Percentages of schools providing selected extra-

curricular activities Primary Preparatory Secondary

All Schools

Sports teams 72% 74% 75% 77% Arts (including theatre and music) 61% 63% 61% 64% Media club (including school newspaper) 43% 50% 50% 52% Academic club (including debating) 53% 58% 60% 63% Boy or girl scouts 29% 29% 27% 38% Community service or environment groups 50% 53% 55% 59% Student council 59% 62% 63% 66% Religious groups 60% 63% 65% 66%

Graph (22): Proportions of schools offering various selected extra-curricular activities [by

school stage] Table (97): Student opinion: satisfaction with activity range [by school type and school stage]

“The range of activities available at the school”Percentage



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 62% 20% 3.6 The percentage satisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’; the percentage dissatisfiedcomprises respondents who indicated they were ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’; and, the percentage indicating they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied are not represented in the table. For overall level of satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates satisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction..

Sports teams Performing &fine arts

Media Club Academic club Scouts Communityservice

Studentcouncil

Religiousgroups


100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


46

Table (98): Parent opinion: satisfaction with the extracurricular activities available


“The extracurricular activities that the school provides”




Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 61% 15% 3.6 The percentage satisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’; the percentage dissatisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’; and, the percentage indicating they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied are not represented in the table. For overall level of satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicatessatisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.

Table (99): Principal opinion: satisfaction with school transport services


“The transportation for students to and from the school”




Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 88% 5% 4.4 The percentage satisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’; the percentage dissatisfiedcomprises respondents who indicated they were ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’; and, the percentage indicating they were neithersatisfied nor dissatisfied are not represented in the table. For overall level of satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates satisfaction; and, 4.2 to5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.


47

Class and school structures

Table (100): Average school days in the school year [by school type]


International All

Schools

Grade 1 183 175 176 180 Grade 2 183 175 177 180 Grade 3 183 177 177 180 Grade 4 183 178 176 180 Grade 5 183 178 177 180 Grade 6 183 178 176 180 Grade 7 181 181 174 178 Grade 8 182 181 174 179 Grade 9 182 181 175 179 Grade 10 181 182 174 178 Grade 11 181 182 172 178 Grade 12 176 176 171 175

Graph (23): Average school days in the school year [by school type]

Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9 Grade 10 Grade 11 Grade 12

Ind PA Int

192 Days

180 Days

168 Days

156Days

144 Days

132Days

120Days

Cla

ss a

nd

sch

oo

l st

ruct

ure

s


48

Table (101): Ratio of total students to total teachers [by school type and school stage] Average of schools’ ratios of total

students to total teachers Average Numbers of Students

per Teacher in the School

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 11.5


All Schools 11.4 Table (102): Average class time (hours) per week: all subjects [by school type]

Average time (hours) per week


International All

Schools

Grade 1 26.8 25.5 24.9 25.9 Grade 2 26.8 24.8 25.2 26.0 Grade 3 27.1 25.2 25.8 26.4 Grade 4 27.2 25.4 25.7 26.5 Grade 5 27.3 25.7 25.5 26.5 Grade 6 27.5 25.7 25.6 26.6 Grade 7 26.9 26.9 25.3 26.2 Grade 8 27.0 26.7 25.5 26.4 Grade 9 26.9 26.7 25.7 26.4 Grade 10 28.0 26.6 26.6 27.3 Grade 11 27.8 26.5 24.5 26.5 Grade 12 27.4 27.0 23.6 26.0

Graph (24): Average class time (in hours) per week for all subjects [by school type]


Ind PA Int

30 Hours

28Hours

26Hours

22Hours

20Hours


49

Table (103): Average class time (hours) per week: Arabic [by school type] Average time (hours) per

week Independent

Private Arabic

International All

Schools


Graph (25): Average class time (in hours) per week for Arabic [by school type] Table (104): Average class time (hours) per week: English [by school type]



International All

Schools



Ind PA Int

7.5Hours

6.0Hours

4.5Hours

3.0Hours

1.5Hours

0Hours


50

Graph (26): Average class time (in hours) per week for English [by school type] Table (105): Average class time (hours) per week: Mathematics [by school type]



International All

Schools


Graph (27): Average class time (in hours) per week for Mathematics [by school type]


Ind PA Int

6.5 Hours

5.2 Hours

3.9 Hours

2.6 Hours

1.3 Hours

0 Hours


Ind PA Int

6.5 Hours

5.2 Hours

3.9 Hours

2.6 Hours

1.3 Hours

0 Hours


51

Table (106): Average class time (hours) per week: Science [by school type]



International All

Schools


Graph (28): Average class time (in hours) per week for Science [by school type]

Table (107): Average class time (hours) per week: Religion [by school type]



International All

Schools



Ind PA Int

6.5 Hours

5.2 Hours

3.9 Hours

2.6 Hours

1.3 Hours

0 Hours


52

Graph (29): Average class time (in hours) per week for Religion [by school type]

Table (108): Average class time (hours) per week: Social Studies [by school type]

Average time (hours) per week Independent Private Arabic

International All

Schools


Graph (30): Average class time (in hours) per week for Social Studies [by school type]


Ind PA Int

6.5 Hours

5.2 Hours

3.9 Hours

2.6 Hours

1.3 Hours

0 Hours


Ind PA Int

6.5 Hours

5.2 Hours

3.9 Hours

2.6 Hours

1.3 Hours

0 Hours


53

Table (109): Principal opinion: satisfaction with amount of instructional time available by school type and school stage]

“The amount of instructional time in the school day available”




Typ

e


Sta


Preparatory 97% 1% 4.6 Secondary84 98% 1% 4.6


Table (110): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with amount of instructional time available [by


“The amount of instructional time in the school day available”




Typ

e


Sta





54


55

Provisions for students with special needs and learning difficulties Table (111): Schools’ access for physically handicapped students


Schools having special access provisions (eg ramps, elevators) to accommodate physically handicapped students

Percentage of Schools

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 47%


All Schools 55%

Graph (31): Schools with special access provisions for the physically handicapped

Table (112): Principal opinion: satisfaction with school’s resources for special needs students [by school type and school stage]

“The school’s resources and facilities to cater for special needs students”




Typ

e


Sta




Schools with special provisions

Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%Schools with special provisions


100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Pro

visi

on

s fo

r st

ud

en

ts w

ith

sp

eci

al

ne

ed

s a

nd

le

arn

ing

dif

ficu

ltie

s


56

Table (113): Teacher opinion: Satisfaction with school’s catering for special needs students [by school type and school stage]

“The school’s capacity to cater for special needs students”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (114): Schools’ general approaches to students with learning difficulties [by school type]

Frequency of schools using various approaches to catering for learning difficulties students


International All

Schools

Treat exactly the same as all students 3.3 2.8 3.1 3.2 Teacher makes special provisions in exams 3.6 2.4 3.2 3.3 Teachers to provide extra help in class 3.7 3.0 3.7 3.6 Teacher to form ability groups in class 3.5 3.3 3.2 3.4 Provide extra person to help child in class 3.3 2.2 2.7 3.0 Provide remedial classes 3.3 2.2 3.0 3.1 Place in special classes 1.5 1.5 1.9 1.7 Help student’s parent assist their child 3.9 3.6 3.6 3.8 Advise them to enrol elsewhere 1.5 2.4 1.9 1.7 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘never’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘rarely’; 2.6 to 3.2 indicating ‘sometimes’; and, 3.3 to 4.0 indicating ‘often’.

Table (115): Schools’ general approaches to students with learning difficulties [by school stage]

Frequency of schools using various approaches to catering for learning difficulties

students Primary Preparatory Secondary

All Schools

Treat exactly the same as all students 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.2 Teacher makes special provisions in exams 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.3 Teachers to provide extra help in class 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.6 Teacher to form ability groups in class 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.4 Provide extra person to help child in class 2.9 2.7 2.8 3.0 Provide remedial classes 2.9 2.9 3.0 3.1 Place in special classes 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 Help student’s parent assist their child 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.8 Advise them to enrol elsewhere 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.7

The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘never’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘rarely’; 2.6 to 3.2 indicating ‘sometimes’; and, 3.3 to 4.0 indicating ‘often’.


57

Table (116): Teacher report: approaches to students with learning difficulties (LD)

[by school type] Frequency with which teachers use various app-roaches to cater for learning difficulties students


International All

Schools

Treats them exactly the same as all students 3.1 2.9 3.1 3.1 Provides individualised help 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.7 Slows the pace of lesson for the whole class 3.4 3.4 2.7 3.3 Arranges extra activities outside of class 2.8 2.8 2.6 2.8 Forms different ability groupings in class 3.2 3.0 3.2 3.2 Gets other students to assist the LD students 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.3 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘never’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘rarely’; 2.6 to 3.2 indicating ‘sometimes’; and, 3.3 to 4.0 indicating ‘often’.

Table (117): Teacher report: approaches to students with learning difficulties (LD) [by school stage]

Frequency with which teachers use various app-roaches to cater for learning difficulties students


Schools

Treats them exactly the same as all students 3.1 3.0 3.0 3.1 Provides individualised help 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.7 Slows the pace of lesson for the whole class 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.3 Arranges extra activities outside of class 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.8 Forms different ability groupings in class 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.2 Gets other students to assist the LD students 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3

The entries in the table represent averages of reported occurrences. The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7indicating ‘never’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘rarely’; 2.6 to 3.2 indicating ‘sometimes’; and, 3.3 to 4.0 indicating ‘often’.

Table (118): Principal opinion: satisfaction with school’s catering for low-performing students


“The availability of support for the school’s low-performing students”




Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 91% 1% 4.3 The percentage satisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’; the percentage dissatisfiedcomprises respondents who indicated they were ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’; and, the percentage indicating they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied are not represented in the table. For overall level of satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates satisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.


58

Table (119): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with school’s catering for low-performing students


“The availability of support for the school’s low-performing students”




Typ

e


Sta





59

Computers and computing Table (120): School computers [by school type and school stage]

Average Number of All Computers

in the School Average Number of Students per School Computers for Students

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 111.1 13.6


All Schools 127.5 12.3 Table (121): Principal opinion: satisfaction with the school’s access to computers


“The school’s access to computing and other educational technology



Average of Overall Level of Satisfaction

Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 84% 8% 4.3 The percentage satisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’; the percentage dissatisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’; and, the percentage indicatingthey were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied are not represented in the table. For overall level of satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicatessatisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.

Table (122): Student opinion: satisfaction with computer access


“The availability of computers for student use at the school”




Typ

e


Sta




Co

mp

ute

rs a

nd

co

mp

uti

ng


60

Table (123): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with access to computers in school [by school type and school stage]

“Teacher access to computer and other educational technology at

school”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (124): Principal report: their computer skill levels [by school type and school stage]

Computer

Skill Levels

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 3.8


All Schools 3.8 The entries in the table represent averages of reported responses. The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.8 indicating ‘notat all skilled’; 1.9 to 2.6 indicating ‘little skilled’; 2.7 to 3.4 indicating‘somewhat skilled’; 3.5 to 4.2 indicating ‘moderately skilled’; and, 4.3 to5.0 indicating ‘very highly skilled’.

Table (125): Teacher report: their computer skill levels [by school type and school stage]

Computer

Skill Levels

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 4.1 Preparatory 4.1 Secondary 4.1

All Schools 4.1 The entries in the table represent averages of reported responses. The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.8 indicating ‘not at all skilled’; 1.9 to 2.6 indicating ‘little skilled’; 2.7 to 3.4 indicating ‘somewhat skilled’; 3.5 to 4.2 indicating ‘moderately skilled’; and, 4.3 to 5.0 indicating ‘very highly skilled’.


61

Table (126): Teacher report: use of computers in the classroom [by school type and school

stage] Teachers who report using

computers within their classrooms Percentage of Teachers

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 68%


All Schools 67% Table (127): Student report: student use of computers in classes and in general [by school type

and school stage] Reported frequency of student use

of computers In classes

Anywhere (in school, at home or elsewhere)

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 3.1 4.1


All Schools 3.0 4.1 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘no days’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘few days’; 2.6 to 3.3 indicating ‘some days’; 3.4 to 4.1 indicating ‘most days’; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicating ‘every day’.

Graph (32): Students use of computers in the classroom [by school type and school stage]

Frequency of class computer use

Ind PA Int

EveryDay

Most Days

Some Days

Few Days

NoDays

Frequency of class computer use


Every Day

Most Days

Some Days

Few Days

NoDays


62

Table (128): Student report: students’ use of the internet for school and non-school purposes [by school type and school stage]

Reported frequency of student use of the internet

Frequency using internet anywhere for schoolwork purposes

Frequency using internet anywhere for non-schoolwork

purposes

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 3.6 3.6


All Schools 3.5 3.7 The entries in the table represent averages of reported occurrences. The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘no days’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘few days’; 2.6 to 3.3 indicating ‘some days’; 3.4 to 4.1 indicating ‘most days’; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicating ‘every day’.

Table (129): Student report: students’ use of the internet school and elsewhere [by school type

and school stage] Reported frequency of student use of the

internet Frequency of using the internet in the

school Frequency of using the internet at

places other than at school

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 2.8 3.9


All Schools 2.8 3.9 The entries in the table represent averages of reported occurrences. The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘no days’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘few days’; 2.6 to 3.3 indicating ‘some days’; 3.4 to 4.1 indicating ‘most days’; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicating ‘every day’.


63

Student academic achievement — Independent schools Table (130): Average QCEA Arabic overall scale scores

Arabic

Grade 4 481 Grade 5 494 Grade 6 522 Grade 7 532 Grade 8 534 Grade 9 547 Grade 10 554 Grade 11 551 The scales have been constructed so that individual student’s scores are typically within the range from 250 to about 900. These scale scores provide a broad indication of the students’ performance, with the higher the score being indicative of stronger performance.

Table (131): Percentages of students at each Standard Level in QCEA Overall Arabic

Below Standards

(Level 1) Below Standards


(Level 3) Approaching

Standards Meets Standards

Grade 4 8% 7% 38% 38% 9% Grade 5 10% 13% 24% 39% 15% Grade 6 6% 5% 17% 51% 21% Grade 7 12% 6% 26% 41% 16% Grade 8 9% 8% 23% 47% 13% Grade 9 10% 10% 27% 34% 19% Grade 10 13% 5% 27% 39% 17% Grade 11 20% 11% 26% 30% 13% There are five standards levels used within the QCEA about student overall performance in the Qatar National Curriculum Standards: Meets Standards; Approaching Standards; Below Standards (Level 3); Below Standards (Level 2); and, Below Standards (Level 1).

Table (132): Average QCEA English Overall scale scores

English


Stu

de

nt

aca

de

mic

ach

iev

em

en

t -

Ind

ep

en

de

nt

sch

oo

ls


64

Table (133): Percentages of students at each Standard Level in QCEA Overall English

Below Standards






Table (134): Average QCEA Mathematics (Overall) and Science (Overall) scale scores

Mathematics

Science

Grade 4 481 565 Grade 5 566 558 Grade 6 534 539 Grade 7 523 522 Grade 8 552 550 Grade 9 545 538

Grade 10 638 Biology Chemistry Physics

519 609 616

Grade 11 644 Biology Chemistry Physics

586 660 612 The scales have been constructed so that individual student’s scores are typically within the range from 250 to about 900. These scale scores provide a broad indication of the students’ performance, with the higher the score being indicative of stronger performance. For each curriculum area there are different scales, so the scores cannot be directly compared across curriculum areas. Moreover, within the Mathematics and Science curriculum areas, the scales have different underlying bases for each grade and thus the scores can also not be directly compared across grades.

Table (135): Percentages of students at each Standard Level in QCEA Overall Mathematics

Below Standards







65

Table (136): Percentages of students at each Standard Level in QCEA Overall Science

Below Standards





Grade 4 6% 10% 32% 22% 30% Grade 5 10% 8% 39% 30% 13% Grade 6 8% 8% 30% 42% 12% Grade 7 7% 8% 27% 50% 7% Grade 8 8% 4% 31% 52% 5% Grade 9 8% 6% 29% 53% 4% Grade 10 (Biology) 19% 7% 33% 37% 4% Grade 10 (Chemistry) 14% 9% 20% 44% 12% Grade 10 (Physics) 20% 8% 36% 32% 4% Grade 11 (Biology) 16% 7% 26% 23% 28% Grade 11 (Chemistry) 12% 16% 35% 25% 13% Grade 11 (Physics) 12% 17% 33% 20% 19% There are five standards levels used within the QCEA about student overall performance in the Qatar National Curriculum Standards: Meets Standards; Approaching Standards; Below Standards (Level 3); Below Standards (Level 2); and, Below Standards (Level 1).

Table (137): Average QCEA Islamic Studies overall scale scores

Islamic Studies


Table (138): Percentages of students at each Standard Level in QCEA Overall Islamic Studies

Below Standards







66

Table (139): Average QCEA Social Studies overall scale scores Social Studies


Table (140): Percentages of students at each Standard Level in QCEA Overall Social Studies

Below Standards







67

Teachers’ expectations of students Table (141): Principal opinion: satisfaction with teachers’ expectations of student

performance [by school type and school stage]

“The school’s teachers’ expectations of how well students will perform”




Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 96% 1% 4.3 The percentage satisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’; the percentage dissatisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’; and, the percentageindicating they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied are not represented in the table. For overall level of satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nordissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates satisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.

Table (142): Student opinion: teachers’ encouragement [by school type and school stage]

“My teachers encourage me to do my best”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 74% 10% 4.0 The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeingcomprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view arenot represented in the table. For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicatesstrong agreement

Te

ach

ers

’ ex

pe

cta

tio

ns

of

stu

de

nts


68


69

Teaching practices Table (143): School use of Arabic as the language of instruction: Mathematics classes [by

school type and school stage] Percentages of schools in which Arabic is the

language of instructionUsed for All

Classers Used for Some

Classes Used for No

Classes

Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 11% 19% 56% Table (144): School use of Arabic as the language of instruction: Science classes [by school

type and school stage] Percentages of schools in which Arabic is the



Classes Used for No

Classes

Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 13% 17% 57% Table (145): School use of Arabic as the language of instruction: Computer classes [by school

type and school stage] Percentages of schools in which Arabic is the



Classes Used for No

Classes

Typ

e


Sta




Te

ach

ing

pra

ctic

es


70

Table (146): School use of Arabic as the language of instruction: Social Studies classes [by school type and school stage]

Percentages of schools in which Arabic is the language of instruction

Used for All Classers

Used for Some Classes

Used for No Classes

Typ


Sta




Table (147): Teacher description of classroom practices [by school type]

Frequency with which various approaches are used in class


International All

Schools

Whole class work lead by the teacher 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.6 Group work in class 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.4 Individual work in class 3.9 3.7 4.3 3.9 Teachers lectures to class 4.0 4.1 4.5 4.1 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates ‘no days’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates ‘few days’; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates ‘some days’; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates ‘most days’; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates ‘every day’.

Graph (33): Teachers: Frequency with which they use various approaches in class [by school

type]

Table (148): Teacher description of classroom practices [by school stage]



Schools

Whole class work lead by the teacher 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.6 Group work in class 4.4 4.2 4.2 4.4 Individual work in class 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 Teachers lectures to class 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.1

The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates ‘no days’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates ‘few days’; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates ‘some days’; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates ‘most days’; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates ‘every day’.

Teacher led wholeclass work

Group work in class Individual studentwork in class

Teacher lectures

Ind PA Int

Every Day

Most Days

Some Days

Few Days

NoDays


71

Graph (34): Teachers: Frequency with which they use various approaches in class [by school stage]

Table (149): Teacher description of nature of work assigned in classes [by school type]

Frequency with which various approaches are used by students in class


International All

Schools

Completing worksheets or workbooks 4.1 4.2 3.8 4.1 Reading supplementary materials or text books 3.9 4.0 3.6 3.9 Short writing assignments or tasks 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.3 Working on long-term projects 2.8 2.7 2.6 2.7 Undertaking extended writing tasks 2.6 2.6 2.7 2.6 Presenting individual or small group oral reports 3.6 3.5 3.3 3.5 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates ‘no days’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates ‘few days’; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates ‘some days’; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates ‘most days’; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates ‘every day’.

Graph (35): Teachers: Frequency of nature of work assigned in classes [by school type]

Teacher led wholeclass work

Group work in class Individual studentwork in class

Teacher lectures


Every Day

Most Days

Some Days

Few Days

NoDays

Completingworksheets

Reading text booksor other materials

Short writing tasks Working on longterm tasks

Extended writingtasks

Presenting oralreports

Ind PA Int

Every Day

Most Days

Some Days

Few Days

NoDays


72

Table (150): Teacher description of nature of work assigned in classes [by school stage] Frequency with which various approaches are used by

students in class Primary Preparatory Secondary

All Schools

Completing worksheets or workbooks 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.1 Reading supplementary materials or text books 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.9 Short writing assignments or tasks 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.3 Working on long-term projects 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 Undertaking extended writing tasks 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.6 Presenting individual or small group oral reports 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.5

The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates ‘no days’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates ‘few days’; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates ‘some days’; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates ‘most days’; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates ‘every day’.

Graph (36): Teachers: Frequency of nature of work assigned in classes [by school stage]

Table (151): Teachers’ use of textbooks with their classes [by school type and school stage]

Number of different textbooks used by the teacher with their classes

Average number of textbooks used

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 2.3


All Schools 2.2 These averages have been computed using weighted appropriately interpolated values for the response categories in order to obtain indicative estimates of the actual figures.

Completingworksheets

Reading text booksor other materials

Short writing tasks Working on longterm tasks

Extended writingtasks

Presenting oralreports


Every Day

Most Days

Some Days

Few Days

NoDays


73

Table (152): Teacher report: teaching/learning aids used in classes [by school type]

Frequency with which various teaching/learning aids are employed within the class


International All

Schools

Text books 3.7 3.7 3.3 3.6 Audio-visual equipment 3.7 3.0 3.2 3.5 Calculators 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.9 Computers 3.6 2.9 2.8 2.4 Realia 3.2 2.9 2.5 3.0 Charts, flash cards and/or manipulative 3.5 3.3 3.2 3.4 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates ‘never’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates ‘rarely’; 2.6 to 3.2indicates ‘sometimes’; 3.3 to 4.0 indicates ‘often’.

Table (153): Teacher report: teaching/learning aids used in classes [by school stage]

Frequency with which various teaching/learning aids are employed within the class


Schools

Text books 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.6 Audio-visual equipment 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.5 Calculators 1.8 1.9 2.0 1.9 Computers 3.3 3.2 3.2 3.4 Realia 3.1 2.8 2.7 3.0 Charts, flash cards and/or manipulative 3.5 3.3 3.3 3.4

The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates ‘never’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates ‘rarely’; 2.6 to 3.2indicates ‘sometimes’; 3.3 to 4.0 indicates ‘often’.

Table (154): Student description of classroom practices [by school type]: Arabic classes



International All

Schools

Whole class work lead by the teacher 3.7 3.6 2.4 3.4 Group work in class 3.7 2.9 1.7 3.2 Individual work in class 3.5 3.8 2.8 3.4 Teacher lectures to class 3.9 4.0 2.7 3.6 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘never’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘almost never’; 2.6 to 3.2 indicating ‘sometimes’; and, 3.3 to 4.0 indicating ‘often’.

Table (155): Student description of classroom practices [by school stage]: Arabic classes



Schools

Whole class work lead by the teacher 3.2 3.1 3.0 3.4 Group work in class 2.9 2.7 2.6 3.2 Individual work in class 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.4 Teacher lectures to class 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.6

The entries in the table represent averages of reported occurrences. The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘never’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘almost never’; 2.6 to 3.2 indicating ‘sometimes’; and, 3.3 to 4.0 indicating ‘often’.


74

Table (156): Student description of extended work within Arabic classes

Number of times extended work has been assigned

Average Number of Times in a Year When Extended Reading

Work Assigned

Average Number of Times in a Year When Extended Writing

Work Assigned

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 4.0 3.3


All Schools 3.7 3.1 These averages have been computed using weighted appropriately interpolated values for the response categories in order to obtain indicative estimates of the actual figures.

Table (157): Student description of classroom practices [by school type]: English classes



International All

Schools


Table (158): Student description of classroom practices [by school stage]: English classes



Schools


The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘never’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘almost never’; 2.6 to 3.2 indicating ‘sometimes’; and, 3.3 to 4.0 indicating ‘often’.

Table (159): Student description of extended work within English classes

Number of times extended work has been assigned

Average Number of Times in a Year When Extended Reading

Work Assigned

Average Number of Times in a Year When Extended Writing

Work Assigned

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 4.4 3.9




75

Table (160): Student description of classroom practices [by school type]: Mathematics classes



International All

Schools


Table (161): Student description of classroom practices [by school stage]: Mathematics classes



Schools



Table (162): Student description of classroom practices [by school type]: Science classes



International All

Schools


Table (163): Student description of classroom practices [by school stage]: Science classes



Schools




76

Table (164): Student opinion: how well schoolwork is understood [by school type and school

stage]

“I understand what my teacher explains in class”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Table (165): Parent report: appropriateness of the difficulty of the schoolwork given their child [by school type and school stage]

Percentages of parents judging the difficulty of the schoolwork

assigned to their children

Schoolwork Assigned Is Too Easy

Schoolwork Assigned Is About Right

Schoolwork Assigned Is Too Difficult

Typ

e


Sta




Table (166): Parent opinion: provision of additional help needed by their child [by school type and school stage]

“The school provides any additional help my child needs to do well”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 63% 16% 3.6 The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeing comprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view are not represented in the table. For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement.


77

Assessment practices and uses of assessment information Table (167): Schools’ use of different assessment instruments/approaches [by school type]

Percentages of schools using selected assessment instruments/approaches


International All

Schools

QCEA tests 2.7 2.0 1.3 2.3 Other standardised tests 1.5 1.2 1.9 1.6 Other external developed tests 2.3 1.8 1.6 2.0 Within-school developed tests 2.9 2.6 2.9 2.8 Student projects or portfolios 2.8 2.3 2.7 2.7 Student performance (music, science, art) 2.6 2.0 2.5 2.5 Individual oral, interview or observation 2.7 2.4 2.7 2.7 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.6 indicating ‘2never’; 1.7 to 2.3 indicating ‘sometimes’; and, 2.4 to 3.0 indicating ‘usually’.

Table (168): Schools’ use of different assessment instruments/approaches [by school stage]

Percentages of schools using selected assessment instruments/approaches


Schools

QCEA tests 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.3 Other standardised tests 1.5 1.7 1.8 1.6 Other external developed tests 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.0 Within-school developed tests 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 Student projects or portfolios 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.7 Student performance (music, science, art) 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Individual oral, interview or observation 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.7

The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.6 indicating ‘never’; 1.7 to 2.3 indicating ‘sometimes’; and, 2.4 to 3.0 indicating ‘usually’.

Table (169): Purposes for which schools’ use student assessment [by school type]

Percentages of schools reporting using student assessment for selected purposes


International All

Schools

Informing parents about child’s progress 99% 100% 100% 100% Making student retention/promotion decisions 89% 56% 82% 84% Making adjustments to instructional practices 97% 91% 91% 95% Comparing its performance with other schools 86% 47% 47% 71% Tracking the school’s performance over time 98% 88% 97% 97% School planning and development 100% 94% 98% 99% Making school effectiveness judgements 96% 84% 93% 94% Making teacher effectiveness judgements 97% 81% 77% 90%

Ass

ess

me

nt

pra

ctic

es

an

d u

ses

of

ass

ess

me

nt

info

rma

tio

n


78

Table (170): Purposes for which schools’ use student assessment [by school stage]

Percentages of schools reporting using student assessment for selected purposes


Schools

Informing parents about child’s progress 100% 99% 99% 100% Making student retention/promotion decisions 80% 82% 81% 84% Making adjustments to instructional practices 94% 92% 92% 95% Comparing its performance with other schools 65% 59% 58% 71% Tracking the school’s performance over time 97% 95% 95% 97% School planning and development 98% 98% 98% 99% Making school effectiveness judgements 92% 93% 93% 94% Making teacher effectiveness judgements 87% 83% 83% 90%

Table (171): Frequency with which schools’ evaluate student progress [by school type]

Number of evaluations of students’ progress undertaken in a year as reported

by the school for each curriculum area Independent

Private Arabic

International All

Schools

Arabic 5.1 4.5 4.7 5.0 English 5.1 4.4 5.2 5.1 Mathematics 5.1 4.4 5.2 5.1 Science 5.1 4.4 5.0 5.0 These averages have been computed using weighted appropriately interpolated values for the response categories in order to obtain indicative estimates of the actual figures.

Graph (37): Frequency of formal student evaluation in selected curriculum areas

[by school type]

Arabic English Mathematics Science

Ind PA Int

10 per Year

8 per Year

6 per Year

4 per Year

2 per Year

0 per Year


79

Table (172): Frequency with which schools’ evaluate student progress [by school stage] Number of evaluations of students’

progress undertaken in a year as reported by the school for each curriculum area


Schools

Arabic 4.8 4.9 4.9 5.0 English 5.0 5.0 5.1 5.1 Mathematics 5.0 5.0 5.1 5.1 Science 4.9 4.9 5.0 5.0

These averages have been computed using weighted appropriately interpolated values for the response categories in order to obtain indicative estimates of the actual figures.

Graph (38): Frequency of formal student evaluation in selected curriculum areas [by school

stage]

Arabic English Mathematics Science


10 per Year

8 per Year

6 per Year

4 per Year

2 per Year

0 per Year ً◌


80


81

Homework Table (173): Teacher report: assignment of homework to students [by school type and school

stage]

Average Number of Days a Week

on which Homework Assigned Average Number of Hours a

Week that Homework is Assigned

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 2.4 1.2



Table (174): Parent report: amount of homework done by child [by school type and school

stage]

Average Hours a Week Child

Spends on Homework

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 1.9


All Schools 1.9

Table (175): Student report: amount of homework done [by school type and school stage]

Average Hours a Week Student Reports

Spending on Homework

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 6.6


All Schools 5.8

Ho

me

wo

rk


82

Graph (39): Students and Parents: Time students spend on homework (hours per week) [by school type]

Graph (40): Students and Parents: Time students spend on homework (hours per week) [by school stage]

Table (176): Student report: proportion of set homework completed [by school type and

school stage]

Proportion of Homework that the

Student Does

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 3.2


All Schools 3.1 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘almost none of the homework’; 1.8to 2.5 indicating ‘some of the homework’; 2.6 to 3.2 indicating ‘most of the homework’; and, 3.3 to 4.0indicating ‘almost all of the homework’.

Students: Amount done Parents: Amount students do


10 Hours

8 Hours

6 Hours

4 Hours

2 Hours

0 Hours

Students: Amount done Parents: Amount students do

Ind PA Int

10 Hours

8 Hours

6 Hours

4 Hours

2 Hours

0 Hours


83

Graph (41): Students: Report on the proportion of assigned homework they complete [by

school type and school stage] Table (177): Student report: parental checking of homework [by school type and school stage]

Frequency with which Parents Check their

Children’s Homework

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 3.7


All Schools 3.5 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates ‘never’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates ‘rarely’; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates ‘sometimes’; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates ‘most times’; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates ‘almost always’.

Table (178): Assignment of homework as reported by teachers, students and parents [by

school type and school stage] Percentages of various groups which report that

homework is assigned Teachers

Students

Parents

Typ

e


Sta




Set homework completed

Ind PA Int

All

Most

Some

None

Set homework completed


All

Most

Some

None


84

Table (179): Parent report: family involvement with their children’s homework [by school


Proportion of Homework with

which the Child is Helped Proportion of Homework which is Checked by a Family Member

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 2.8 3.2


All Schools 2.5 2.9 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicating ‘almost none of the homework’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicating ‘some of the homework’; 2.6 to 3.2 indicating ‘most of the homework’; and, 3.3 to 4.0 indicating ‘almost all of the homework’.

Table (180): Parent opinion: the value of the homework assigned [by school type and school

stage]

“The homework assigned in school is worthwhile”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta





85

Student attitudes

Table (181): Student opinion: enjoyment of Arabic classes [by school type and school stage]

“I enjoy Arabic classes” Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Table (182): Student opinion: enjoyment of English classes [by school type and school stage]

“I enjoy English classes” Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e

Semi-Independent 67% 18% 3.7 Private Arabic 73% 15% 3.9 International 76% 9% 3.9

Sta




Table (183): Student opinion: enjoyment of Mathematics classes [by school type and school stage]

“I enjoy Mathematics classes” Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Stu

de

nt

att

itu

de

s


86

Table (184): Student opinion: enjoyment of Science classes [by school type and school stage]

“I enjoy Science classes” Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 72% 13% 3.8 The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeing comprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view are not represented in the table. For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement.

Table (185): Parent opinion: the degree to which their child works hard at school [by school type and school stage]

“My child puts in much effort at school”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Table (186): Principal opinion: satisfaction with students’ motivation to learn [by school type and school stage]

“The school’s students’ motivation to learn”




Typ

e


Sta





87

Table (187): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with students’ motivation to learn [by school type and school stage]

Table (188): Students’ further educational aspirations [by school type and school stage]

Highest level of education to which students aspire

Percentage Below a Bachelor’s Degree



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 20% 11% 69% Graph (42): Students' educational level aspirations [by school type and school stage]

“My students’ motivation to learn” Percentage



Typ

e


Sta






Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%Below Bachelor


degree


100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


88

Table (189): Parents’ further educational aspirations for their child [by school type and school stage]

Highest level of education to which parents aspire for their child

Percentage Below a Bachelor’s Degree



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 15% 11% 75% Graph (43): Parents’ further educational aspirations for their children [by school type and

school stage] Table (190): Student opinion: satisfaction that school prepares for the future [by school type

and school stage]

“How well the school is preparing me for the future”




Typ

e


Sta






Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%Below Bachelor


degree


100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%


89

Student Attendance and Punctuality Table (191): Parent report: student absenteeism [by school type and school stage]

Average Percentage Days Their

Child is Absent from School

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 8%


All Schools 9% These average percentages have been computed using weighted appropriatelyinterpolated values for the response categories in order to obtain indicative estimatesof the actual figures.

Table (192): Student report: absenteeism and tardiness [by school type and school stage]

Average Percentage Days Absent

from School Average Percentage Days Late

Getting to School

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 16% 15%


All Schools 17% 15% These average percentages have been computed using weighted appropriately interpolated values for the response categories in order to obtain indicative estimates of the actual figures.

Graph (44): Parents and students: Proportions of days in which students are absent from

school [by school type and school stage]

As reported by parents As reported by students

Ind PA Int

20%

16%

12%

8%

4%

0%As reported by parents As reported by students


20%

16%

12%

8%

4%

0%

Stu

de

nt

att

en

da

nce

an

d p

un

ctu

ali

ty


90

Graph (45): Students: Proportions of days in which students are late getting to school [by school type and school stage]

Table (193): Principal opinion: satisfaction with students’ attendance and punctuality [by


“The levels of student attendance and punctuality at the school”




Typ

e


Sta




As reported by students

Ind PA Int

20%

16%

12%

8%

4%

0%As reported by students


20%

16%

12%

8%

4%

0%


91

Student Behaviour and Discipline

Table (194): Student opinion: fairness of school discipline [by school type and school stage]

“Discipline is fair at my school” Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Table (195): Parent opinion: school discipline [by school type and school stage]

“The school maintains good discipline and order”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Table (196): Teacher opinion: views on the principal’s enforcement of behaviour policy [by school type and school stage]

“That the principal enforces rules about student behaviour”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Stu

de

nt

be

ha

vio

ur

an

d d

isci

pli

ne


92

Table (197): Parent opinion: satisfaction with how the school treats their child [by school type and school stage]

“How well the school treats their child”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (198): Principal opinion: satisfaction with student behaviour and discipline [by school type and school stage]

“The behaviour and discipline of the students at the school”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (199): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with students’ behaviour and discipline [by school type and school stage]

“My students’ behaviour and discipline”




Typ

e


Sta





93

Table (200): Student opinion: safety at school [by school type and school stage]

“My school is a safe place to be” Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Table (201): Student report: frequency of being subject to theft or bullying [by school type

and school stage] Frequency in a year with which student have been subject to negative actions”

Average Times Something Has been Stolen

Average Times Subject to Threat of Physical Violence

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 1.1 1.2



Table (202): Student report: degree of students’ attention to schoolwork [by school type and

school stage]

“In my school students care about their schoolwork”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta





94

Table (203): Student report: disobeying school rules [by school type and school stage] Frequency in a year with which student has been sent to

the principal’s office for disobeying school rules Average Times Student Sent to the Principal’s

Office for Disobeying School Rules T

ype


Sta

ge Primary 0.67



Table (204): Student report: school contacts parents about behaviour

Frequency in a year with which student’s parents have been contacted by the school for wrongdoing

Average Times Student’s Parents Have Been Contacted by School about Student Wrongdoing

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 0.52


All Schools 0.49 These averages have been computed using weighted appropriately interpolated values for the response categories in order to 0.3obtain indicative estimates of the actual figures.


95

Parent-School Communications

Table (205): Schools’ parent reporting practices [by school type and school stage]

Percentages of schools which use selected approaches to parent reporting

Report at End of Each Term

Report at Defined Time in Each

Term

Report on an As-Requested Basis

Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 98% 85% 88% Graph (46): Proportions of schools using selected parent reporting frequencies [by school

type]

Graph (47): Proportions of schools using selected parent reporting frequencies [by school stage]

At end of each semester At defined times in eachsemester

On an as-requested basis

Ind PA Int

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

At end of each semester At defined times in eachsemester

On an as-requested basis


100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Pa

ren

t-S

cho

ol

com

mu

nic

ati

on

s


96

Table (206): Parent report: frequency of parental-school contacts [by school type and school stage]

Frequency in a year with which there has been personal home-school contact

Average Times Parents Have Contacted the School

Average Times School Has Contacted the Parents

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 3.2 1.5



Graph (48): Parents: Numbers of parent–school contacts in a school year [by school type and

school stage] Table (207): Parent report: frequency of receiving student report cards from the school [by

school type and school stage] Frequency in a year with which parents have received

student report cards from the school Average Times Student Reports

Cards Received from School

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 2.0



Parent contacts theschool

School contacts theparent

Ind PA Int

5

4

3

2

1

0Parent contacts the

schoolSchool contacts the

parent


5

4

3

2

1

0


97

Graph (49): Parents: Numbers of student report cards received from the school in a school year [by school type and school stage]

Table (208): Parent report: frequency of receiving information from the school [by school type

and school stage] Frequency with which parents have received information (eg publications, circulars, newsletters) from the school

Average Frequency Parents Receive Information from School

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 19.5



Graph (50): Parents: Numbers of sets of information received from the school in a school year


Student report cards received

Ind PA Int

5

4

3

2

1

0Student report cards received


5

4

3

2

1

0

Sets of information material received

Ind PA Int

25

8

20

15

10

5

0Sets of information material received


25

20

15

10

5

0


98

Table (209): Teacher report: frequency of teacher communications with students’ parents [by school type and school stage]

Average Frequency of Teacher Communication with

Their Students’ Parents T

ype


Sta

ge Primary 3.2


All Schools 3.1 The averages may be broadly interpreted as follows: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates ‘never’; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates ‘rarely’; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates ‘some days’; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates ‘most days’; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates ‘every day’.

Table (210): Parent report: frequency of involvement in educational activities

[by school type and school stage] Frequency in a year with which parents have been involved in selected activities

Average Times Observing Classroom Activities

Average Times Talking with a Teacher or Principal

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 0.5 2.3



Table (211): Parent opinion: satisfaction with the school’s communications


“How well the school communicates with them”




Typ

e


Sta





99

Parents’ involvement in, and interactions with, school

Table (212): Schools’ expectations of its students’ parents [by school type]

Percentages of schools indicating selected expectations of its students’ parents


International All

Schools

Notify it of student’s home problems 69% 77% 92% 77% Notify it if student has problem with peers 99% 95% 94% 97% Inform teacher if child has lesson problems 98% 91% 96% 97% Help their child with homework 86% 88% 86% 86% Raise funds for school 41% 7% 13% 28% Volunteer for school projects/programs 81% 35% 72% 73% Respond to school enquiries 95% 93% 99% 96% Attend school-wide events 94% 91% 94% 94% Attend teacher interviews about child 96% 98% 99% 97% Observe their child’s classroom 92% 84% 41% 76% Attend parent council meetings 95% 93% 84% 92%

Table (213): Schools’ expectations of its students’ parents [by school stage] Percentages of schools indicating selected

expectations of its students’ parents Primary Preparatory Secondary

All Schools

Notify it of student’s home problems 79% 83% 83% 77% Notify it if student has problem with peers 97% 96% 96% 97% Inform teacher if child has lesson problems 96% 96% 95% 97% Help their child with homework 88% 85% 86% 86% Raise funds for school 24% 18% 23% 28% Volunteer for school projects/programs 72% 66% 67% 73% Respond to school enquiries 96% 97% 98% 96% Attend school-wide events 95% 94% 92% 94% Attend teacher interviews about child 98% 97% 98% 97% Observe their child’s classroom 73% 64% 63% 76% Attend parent council meetings 92% 89% 88% 92%

Table (214): Principal opinion: parental involvement in their child’s education [by school type and school stage]

“Parents are involved with their child’s education at this school”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 79% 4% 4.1 The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeing comprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view are not represented in thetable. For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement.

Pa

ren

ts’ i

nvo

lve

me

nt

in,

an

d i

nte

ract

ion

s w

ith

, sc

ho

ol


100

Table (215): Principal opinion: satisfaction with parental support for learning [by school type

and school stage]

“The parental support at your school for student learning”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (216): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with parental support for learning [by school type

and school stage]

“Parental support at your school for student learning”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (217): Parents’ description of frequency of involvement in aspects of school

[by school type] Frequency in a year with which parents have

participated in selected school activities Independent

Private Arabic

International All

Schools

Participate in parent council 1.5 0.9 1.3 1.4 Serve on school committees 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.6 Volunteer to help in the classroom 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.4 Help with school activities and/or fundraising 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.8 Attend a school event 0.9 0.7 1.2 0.9 These averages have been computed using weighted appropriately interpolated values for the response categories in order to obtain indicative estimates of the actual figures.


101

Graph (51): Parents: Frequency of involvement in aspects of the school in the year [by school

type] Table (218): Parents’ description of frequency of involvement in aspects of school

[by school stage] Frequency in a year with which parents have

participated in selected school activities Primary Preparatory Secondary

All Schools

Participate in parent council 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.4 Serve on school committees 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.6 Volunteer to help in the classroom 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 Help with school activities and/or fundraising 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.8 Attend a school event 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.9

These averages have been computed using weighted appropriately interpolated values for the response categories in order to obtain indicative estimates of the actual figures.

Graph (52): Parents: Frequency of involvement in aspects of the school in the year [by school

stage]

Participate in ParentCouncil

Serve on schoolcommittees

Volunteer to helpin the classroom

Help to fundraise orin school activities

Attend a school event


2.0

1.6

1.2

0.8

0.4

0

Participate in ParentCouncil

Serve on schoolcommittees

Volunteer to helpin the classroom

Help to fundraise orin school activities

Attend a school event

Ind PA Int

2.0

1.6

1.2

0.8

0.4

0


102

Table (219): Parent opinion: involvement in school decisions [by school type and school stage]

“I have an adequate say in school decisions affecting my child”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Table (220): Schools’ reporting of parent participation in its activities [by school type]

Percentages of schools reporting that parents actually participate in selected activities


International All

Schools

Attending parent council 100% 97% 79% 94% School fund raising activities 49% 6% 19% 36% Volunteering in the classrooms 46% 16% 47% 43% Assisting with other school programs 86% 34% 80% 78% Serving on school committee/board 83% 41% 54% 70% Deciding how school budget will be spent 42% 3% 7% 28% Advising on special programs 88% 63% 67% 79%

Table (221): Schools’ reporting of parent participation in its activities [by school stage]

Percentages of schools reporting that parents actually participate in selected activities


Schools

Attending parent council 92% 89% 89% 94% School fund raising activities 30% 29% 27% 36% Volunteering in the classrooms 43% 38% 39% 43% Assisting with other school programs 75% 75% 73% 78% Serving on school committee/board 66% 62% 63% 70% Deciding how school budget will be spent 21% 17% 19% 28% Advising on special programs 74% 73% 74% 79%


103

Table (222): Principal opinion: students’ parents’ involvement in the school [by school type and school stage]

“The parents of students are involved with this school”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Table (223): Principal opinion: school’s welcoming of parents [by school type and school stage]

“That the parents are welcome at this school”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Table (224): Teacher opinion: school’s welcoming of parents [by school type and school stage]

“That the parents are welcome at this school”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta





104

Table (225): Principal opinion: teachers’ relationship with students’ parents [by school type

and school stage]

“The school’s teachers have a good relationship with the students’ parents”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta




Table (226): Teacher opinion: teachers’ relationship with students’ parents [by school type

and school stage]

“The school’s teachers have a good relationship with the students’ parents”

Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 88% 3% 4.3 The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeing comprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view are not represented in the table.For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates aneutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement


105

Aspects of client satisfaction

Table (227): Student opinion: satisfaction with school [by school type and school stage]

“That the school is a good one” Percentage



Typ

e


Sta

ge

Primary 73% 14% 3.9 Preparatory 68% 16% 3.8 Secondary 64% 17% 3.6

All Schools 69% 16% 3.8 The percentage satisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’; the percentage dissatisfied comprises respondents who indicated they were ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’; and, the percentage indicating they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied are not represented in the table. For overall level of satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates satisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.

Table (228): Parent opinion: satisfaction with education provided by the school [by school type and school stage]

“My child is getting a good education at the school”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (229): Parent opinion: satisfaction with the quality of the school’s curriculum [by school type and school stage]

“The quality of the curriculum provided by the school”




Typ

e


Sta




Asp

ect

s o

f cl

ien

t S

ati

sfa

ctio

n


106

Table (230): Student opinion: satisfaction about their school providing a good education [by school type and school stage]

“That the school provides you with a good education”



Average for Overall Levelof Satisfaction

Typ

e


Sta

ge



Table (231): Student opinion: satisfaction about their school preparing them for work [by school type and school stage]

“That the school prepares you well for work” Percentage



Typ

e


Sta

ge



Table (232): Student opinion: satisfaction about their school preparing them for parenthood [by school type and school stage]

“That the school prepares you well to be a good parent”




Typ

e


Sta

ge




107

Table (233): Student opinion: satisfaction about their school preparing them for citizenship [by school type and school stage]

“That the school prepares you well to be a good citizen”




Typ

e


Sta

ge



Table (234): Parent opinion: satisfaction with school as preparation for the future [by school


“The school’s preparation of your child for their future”




Typ

e


Sta




Table (235): Student opinion: pride in their school [by school type and school stage]

“The students are proud of their school” Percentage Agreeing


Average for Overall Levelof Agreement

Typ

e


Sta





108

Table (236): Student opinion: how well they like school [by school type and school stage]

“I like my school” Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 59% 21% 3.5 The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeing comprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view are not represented in thetable. For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement

Table (237): Parent opinion: how well their child enjoys school [by school type and school

stage]

“My child enjoys going to school” Percentage Agreeing



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 73% 11% 3.8 The percentage agreeing comprises respondents who ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’; the percentage disagreeing comprises respondents who ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’; and, the percentage expressing a neutral view are not represented in thetable. For overall level of agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement.


109

Comparative information 2009-10 to 2011-12: Selected indicators Table (238): Teachers’ formal teaching qualifications 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school

stage] Percentage of teachers with formal

teaching qualifications Percentagein 2009-10

Percentage in 2010-11


Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 72% 72% 70% Graph (53): Proportions of teachers with formal teaching qualifications [by school type] Graph (54): Proportions of teachers with formal teaching qualifications [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

Private Arabic Independent International

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

Co

mp

ara

tive

in

form

ati

on

20

09

-10

to

20

11-1

2:

sele

cte

d i

nd

ica

tors


110

Table (239): Principal opinion: satisfaction with instructional quality of school’s teachers

2009 to 2012

“The instructional skills and abilities of the school’s teachers”

Overall Satisfaction in 2009-10



Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 4.4 4.4 4.4 For overall satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates satisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.

Graph (55): Principal satisfaction with the quality of the school's teachers [by school type] Graph (56): Principal satisfaction with the quality of the school's teachers [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied

Strongly Dissatisfied

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied



111

Table (240): Principal opinion: their autonomy 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school stage]

“My being allowed to change things at the school that need changing”

Overall Agreement in

2009-10


2010-11


2011-12

Typ

e Independent 4.5 4.4 4.5 Private Arabic 4.5 4.5 4.5 International 4.4 4.2 4.5

Sta



All Schools 4.4 4.4 4.5 For overall satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates satisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction

Graph (57): Principal view: "I have the freedom to change things in the school requiring change" [by school type]

Graph (58): Principal view: "I have the freedom to change things in the school requiring

change" [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree


112

Table (241): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with school leadership 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school stage]

“The quality of the school’s leadership”

Overall Satisfaction in

2009-10


2010-11


2011-12 T

ype


Sta




Graph (59): Teacher satisfaction with school leadership [by school type] Graph (60): Teacher satisfaction with school leadership [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied


2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied



113

Table (242): Teacher opinion: valuing of their opinion in school decisions 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school stage]

“My opinion matters in school decision-making”


2009-10


2010-11


2011-12 T

ype


Sta



All Schools 3.5 3.4 3.5 For overall agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3 indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement.

Graph (61): Teacher view: "My opinion matters in school decision-making" [by school type] Graph (62): Teacher view: "My opinion matters in school decision-making" [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12Primary Preparatory Secondary

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree


114

Table (243): Teacher opinion: whether the school is a well-organised place to work 2009 to

2012 [by school type and school stage]

“The school is a well-organised place to work”


2009-10


2010-11


2011-12 T

ype


Sta



All Schools 4.0 4.0 4.0 For overall agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3

indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement. Graph (63): Teacher view: "The school is a well-organised place to work" [by school type] Graph (64): Teacher view: "The school is a well-organised place to work" [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree


115

Table (244): Teacher report: professional development time 2009 to 2012 Time (hours) spent in year on

professional development Average Time

in 2009-10 Average Time

in 2010-11 Average Time

in 2011-12

Typ

e


Sta

ge Primary 41.4 48.6 43.6


All Schools 44.6 54.1 49.2 Graph (65): Teacher professional development time [by school type] Graph (66): Teacher professional development time [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


100 Hours

80 Hours

60 Hours

40 Hours

20 Hours

0 Hours

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


100 Hours

80 Hours

60 Hours

40 Hours

20 Hours

0 Hours


116

Table (245): Teacher opinion: satisfaction with the quality of professional development 2009

to 2012 [by school type and school stage]

“The quality of the professional development available in this school”


2009-10


2010-11


2011-12

Typ

e


Sta



All Schools 3.8 3.9 4.0 For overall satisfaction: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong dissatisfaction; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates dissatisfaction; 2.6 to 3.3

indicates neither satisfied nor dissatisfied; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates satisfaction; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong satisfaction.

Graph (67): Teacher satisfaction with professional development quality [by school type] Graph (68): Teacher satisfaction with professional development quality [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied


2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied



117

Table (246): Student opinion: teacher encouragement 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school

stage]

“My teachers encourage me to do my best”


2009-10


2010-11


2011-12 T

ype


Sta




Graph (69): Student view: "My teachers encourage me to do my best" [by school type] Graph (70): Student view: "My teachers encourage me to do my best" [by school Stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied


2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied



118

Table (247): Student opinion: satisfaction with activity range 2009 to 2012 [by school type and

school stage]

“The range of activities available at the school”




Typ

e


Sta




Graph (71): Student satisfaction with the school's range of activities [by school type] Graph (72): Student satisfaction with the school's range of activities [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied


2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied



119

Table (248): School computers 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school stage] Average number of students per

school computer Average in

2009-10 Average in

2010-11 Average in

2011-12

Typ


Sta

ge Primary 8.3 7.0 13.6


All Schools 7.7 6.8 12.3 Graph (73): Average number of students per school computer [by school type] Graph (74): Average number of students per school computer [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


50

40

30

20

10

0

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


40

32

24

17

8

0


120

Table (249): Student opinion: satisfaction with computer access 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school stage]

“The availability of computers for student use at the school”




Typ


Sta




Graph (75): Student satisfaction with access to computers at school [by school type] Graph (76): Student satisfaction with access to computers at school [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12Private Arabic Independent International

Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied


2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied



121

Table (250): Average QCEA Arabic (Overall) scale scores 2009 to 2012

Average Scale Score

in 2009-10 Average Scale Score


in 2011-12

Grade 4 469 477 481 Grade 5 483 492 494 Grade 6 501 515 522 Grade 7 523 538 532 Grade 8 521 539 534 Grade 9 534 554 547 Grade 10 533 559 554 Grade 11 526 561 551 The scales have been constructed so that individual student’s scores are typically within the range from 250 to about 900. These scale scores provide a broad indication of the students’ performance, with the higher the score being indicative of stronger performance. For each curriculum area there are different scales, so the scores cannot be directly compared across curriculum areas.

Graph (77): Average QCEA Arabic (Overall) scale scores [Independent Schools]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7


600

580

560

540

520

500

480

460

440

420

400


122

Table (251): Average QCEA English (Overall) scale scores 2009 to 2012

Average Scale Score



in 2011-12

Grade 4 522 524 526 Grade 5 529 533 535 Grade 6 535 541 547 Grade 7 536 547 549 Grade 8 534 550 550 Grade 9 546 558 560 Grade 10 547 564 565 Grade 11 553 568 567 The scales have been constructed so that individual student’s scores are typically within the range from 250 to about 900. These scale scores provide a broad indication of the students’ performance, with the higher the score being indicative of stronger performance. For each curriculum area there are different scales, so the scores cannot be directly compared across curriculum areas.

Graph (78): Average QCEA English (Overall) scale scores [Independent Schools]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12



600

580

560

540

520

500

480

460

440

420

400


123

Table (252): Average QCEA Mathematics (Overall) scale scores 2009 to 2012 Graph (79): Average QCEA Mathematics (Overall) scale scores [Independent Schools]

Average Scale Score



in 2011-12

Grade 4 418 463 481 Grade 5 488 537 566 Grade 6 495 504 534 Grade 7 492 513 523 Grade 8 490 540 552 Grade 9 484 535 545 Grade 10 685 641 638 Grade 11 636 658 644 The scales have been constructed so that individual student’s scores are typically within the range from 250 to about 900. These scale scores provide a broad indication of the students’ performance, with the higher the score being indicative of stronger performance. For each curriculum area there are different scales, so the scores cannot be directly compared across curriculum areas. Moreover, within the Mathematics curriculum area, the scales have different underlying bases for each grade and thus the scores can also not be directly compared across grades.

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12



750

715

680

645

610

575

540

505

470

435

400

Note that QCEA Mathematics scores can’t be directly compared a cross grades

750

715

680

645

610

575

540

505

470

435

400


124

Table (253): Average QCEA Science (Overall) scale scores 2009 to 2012

Average Scale Score

in 2009-10 Average Scale Scores

in 2010-11 Average Scale Scores

In 2011-12

Grade 4 475 555 565 Grade 5 494 564 558 Grade 6 459 528 539 Grade 7 478 518 522 Grade 8 462 543 550 Grade 9 483 540 538

Grade 10 648 Biology Chemistry Physics Biology Chemistry Physics

617 612 626 519 609 616

Grade 11 605 Biology Chemistry Physics Biology Chemistry Physics

654 668 621 586 660 612 The scales have been constructed so that individual student’s scores are typically within the range from 250 to about 900. These scale scores provide a broad indication of the students’ performance, with the higher the score being indicative of stronger performance. For each curriculum area there are different scales, so the scores cannot be directly compared across curriculum areas. Moreover, within the Science curriculum area, the scales have different underlying bases for each grade and thus the scores can also not be directly compared across grades.

Graph (80): Average QCEA Science (Overall) scale scores [Independent Schools]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12



750

715

680

645

610

575

540

505

470

435

400

Note that QCEA Science scores can’t be directly compared a cross grades


125

Table (254): Average QCEA Islamic Studies (Overall) scale scores 2010 to 2012 Graph (81): Average QCEA Islamic Studies (Overall) scale scores [Independent Schools]

2010-11 2011-12



750

715

680

645

610

575

540

505

470

435

400

750

715

680

645

610

575

540

505

470

435

400

Average Scale Score


in 2011-12

Grade 4 476 474 Grade 5 469 469 Grade 6 480 479 Grade 7 460 467 Grade 8 452 453 Grade 9 476 479 Grade 10 489 482 Grade 11 485 480 The scales have been constructed so that individual student’s scores are typically within the range from 300 to about 600. These scale scores provide a broad indication of the students’ performance, with the higher the score being indicative of stronger performance.


126

Table (255): Student report: absenteeism 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school stage] Graph (82): Proportion of days students absent from school [by school type] Graph (83): Proportion of days students absent from school [by school stage]

Average percentage days student reports being absent from school




Typ


Sta




2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


20%

16%

12%

8%

4%

0%

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


20%

16%

12%

8%

4%

0%


127

Table (256): Parent opinion: satisfaction with the school’s communications 2009 to 2012 [ by school type and school stage]

“How well the school communicates with them”


2009-10


2010-11


2011-12 T

ype


Sta



All Schools 3.7 3.7 3.7 Graph (84): Parent satisfaction with the school's communications [by school type] Graph (85): Parent satisfaction with the school's communications [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied


2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied



128

Table (257): Parent opinion: involvement in school decisions 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school stage]

“I have an adequate say in school decisions affecting my child”


2009-10


2010-11


2011-12 T

ype


Sta




Graph (86): Parent view: "I have an adequate say in school decisions about my child" [by

school type] Graph (87): Parent view: "I have an adequate say in school decisions about my child" [by

school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree


129

Table (258): Parent opinion: satisfaction with how well the school treats their child 2009 to

2012 [by school type and school stage]

“How well the school treats their child”


2009-10


2010-11


2011-12 T

ype


Sta




Graph (88): Parent satisfaction with how well the school treats their child [by school type] Graph (89): Parent satisfaction with how well the school treats their child [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied


2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied



130

Table (259): Student opinion: satisfaction with school 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school stage]

“That the school is a good one” Overall

Satisfaction in 2009-10


2010-11

Overall Satisfaction

2011-12 T

ype


Sta




Graph (90): Student satisfaction with the school [by school type] Graph (91): Student satisfaction with the school [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12Private Arabic Independent International

Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied


2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied



131

Table (260): Student opinion: satisfaction about school providing a good education 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school stage]

“That the school provides you with a good education”


2009-10


2010-11


2011-12

Typ

e


Sta




Graph (92): Student satisfaction with the school's quality of education [by school type] Graph (93): Student satisfaction with the school's quality of education [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied


2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied



132

Table (261): Student opinion: how well they enjoy school 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school stage]

“I enjoy going to school” Overall

Agreement in 2009-10


2010-11


2011-12 T

ype


Sta



All Schools 3.7 3.6 3.5 For overall agreement: 1.0 to 1.7 indicates strong disagreement; 1.8 to 2.5 indicates disagreement; 2.6 to 3.3

indicates a neutral view; 3.4 to 4.1 indicates agreement; and, 4.2 to 5.0 indicates strong agreement. Graph (94): Student view: "I enjoy school" [by school type] Graph (95): Student view: "I enjoy school" [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree


133

Table (262): Parent opinion: how well their child enjoys school 2009 to 2012

“My child enjoys going to school” Overall

Agreement in 2009-10


2010-11


2011-12

Typ


Sta




Graph (96): Parent view: "My child enjoys school" [by school type] Graph (97): Parent view: "My child enjoys school" [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree


134

Table (263): Parent opinion: satisfaction with the education provided by the school 2009 to 2012 [by school type and school stage]

“My child is getting a good education at this school”




Typ


Sta




Graph (98): Parent satisfaction with the school providing good education [by school type] Graph (99): Parent satisfaction with the school providing good education [by school stage]

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied


2009-10 2010-11 2011-12


Strongly Satisfied

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied


SchoolsReport2011-2012

Documents

Transcript of SchoolsReport2011-2012