The World Bank contributed to learning outcomes at the global, regional, and country levels between FY12 and FY22, doing so by convening stakeholders, raising awareness, increasing available data, and financing operations. These contributions have been broadly positive, developing partnerships and pooling financing to address the learning crisis, developing GPG, and reducing financing and capacity gaps in client countries. The World Bank also shaped global discourse to emphasize learning for all. The WDR 2018 renewed attention on the need to address political barriers and the need for more efforts in client countries to measure learning and identify system failures. The World Bank itself has adopted a strong stance on the importance of good-quality foundational learning, and the Education GP has increased its emphasis on the development of foundational skills:

Foundational learning is exactly what it sounds like—the foundations of a child’s education. It refers to basic literacy, numeracy, and transferable skills, that are the building blocks for a life of learning. Just as we would not build a house without solid foundations, we cannot expect a child to thrive without solid foundational skills. (Herbert et al. 2021)

Contributions at the global level have included activities to build awareness and convene global stakeholders to build commitment to address low levels of learning. The World Bank’s high-quality data and analytics have addressed improvement in quality and learning and drawn attention to the learning crisis. With the Commitment to Action, launched at the United Nations Secretary-General’s September 2022 Transforming Education Summit, the World Bank and partners advanced support for foundational learning. Since then, partners of the Global Coalition for Foundational Learning have encouraged more countries to sign the Commitment to Action.1 World Bank vice presidents have played a key role by encouraging ministers of education and finance in client countries to improve learning for all. For example, a high-level meeting in Latin America in March 2023 convened many regional partners and was followed by collaboration with the Inter-American Dialogue, the Inter-American Development Bank, and other partners to raise awareness of the region’s learning crisis (World Bank 2023a). In addition, UNESCO’s Laboratorio Latinoamericano de Evaluación de la Calidad de la Educación ensured regular data collection for calculating learning poverty through regional standardized tests (Colombia, Ministry of Education 2023).

World Bank contributions at the global and regional levels have developed and shared knowledge. Findings from the WDR 2018 were presented at 100 dissemination events in 54 countries, particularly low- and middle-income countries. The WDR was the second-most-downloaded global report in World Bank history. Practice managers invited members of the WDR team to discussions with finance and education ministry officials, local civil society, and researchers to spur further political commitment. Valuable global and regional contributions have supported assessing levels of education policy development (SABER), producing comprehensive regional reports (Facing Forward: Schooling for Learning in Africa), supporting policy reform through dialogue and knowledge dissemination (Great Teachers: How to Raise Student Learning in Latin America and the Caribbean), and defining learning poverty and gaining buy-in from stakeholders.

Contributions at the country level have sought to build awareness and shared knowledge and have addressed challenges associated with learning for all through activities and interventions, as highlighted in the conceptual framework. Although few country knowledge products relate to basic education, the World Bank and the GPE have nonetheless contributed to the development of national education strategies in many countries. Those strategies have increasingly focused on learning and have progressive content about inclusion and equity, reflecting commitments under the SDGs. The extent to which strategic ambitions for equity and inclusion are implemented varies, however, subject to country factors, such as the political economy of education, available resources, and implementation capacity.

The World Bank delivered interventions to education systems in 91 countries during the evaluation period; however, few of these interventions translated into improved teaching, systems, or learning. In most cases, the most commonly supported inputs, such as government-level management, in-service teacher training, and school management, were provided without addressing the root causes of learning failure in the education system. Project measurement has emphasized output indicators and has not drawn on other evaluations to assess whether positive changes are occurring in measurement of learning, system capacity, and teaching consistent with intermediate outcomes in the conceptual framework. Without evidence that the supported interventions are effective and contributing to improvements in learning for all, the World Bank is missing important feedback, despite the emphasis on systems-based reforms emphasized in its strategy and in the WDR 2018.

The contribution to learning outcomes could have been enhanced if the World Bank had adopted an outcome rather than output orientation at all levels. The World Bank’s focus on activities and outputs is evident in work at the global level, such as the absence of outcome orientation in the results framework for the Foundational Learning Compact trust fund.2 A theory of change for the trust fund would facilitate planning, implementation, and monitoring of how country clients use global and regional analytics. This change is aligned with The Knowledge Compact for Action: Transforming Ideas into Development Impact (World Bank 2024b), which will require stronger monitoring to provide a feedback loop to the World Bank. The lack of outcome orientation at the country and project levels is evident where measurement, and success, is usually articulated in terms of outputs. Although that work is typically of high technical quality, its relevance to the achievement of enhanced learning outcomes for all is limited because it is not designed with that outcome in mind. Specifically, at the country and project levels, the evolution toward an outcome orientation can be supported by a systems approach and through reforms in measurement of learning, teaching career framework, equity, and capacity. This will require enhanced national assessment capacity based on improved monitoring and evaluation functions. More detailed theories of change will need to define the pathways from enhancements of preservice institutions, teacher recruitment, and teacher monitoring to intermediate outcomes and how those outcomes are to result in improved pedagogical practices in classrooms that increase student learning.

Measurement

Learning poverty is an easily understood concept that has gained global stakeholder buy-in. The World Bank and multiple partners have supported ambitious targets to motivate global and country stakeholders toward collective action and alignment on a single target and message. Reducing learning poverty was added to the World Bank’s corporate targets at the 2023 Annual Meetings of the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund, replacing the previous indicator of human capital (measured as students reached). The increased attention to outcomes is welcome; however, without further attention by the World Bank and partners to address the lack of underlying data (to calculate learning poverty), the indicator will be unable to fill its critical global and corporate monitoring function. Data required to calculate learning poverty are unavailable in some countries in all Regions, including many countries where learning poverty is likely extreme.

Progress has been made in supporting systems in a few countries to measure learning, which will provide data to assess progress on SDG target 4.1. All leading education systems have a learning assessment function in place—a prerequisite to focusing on improvements in learning. The SABER Learning Assessment Platform and READ provide numerous tools, reports, and GPGs designed to improve global knowledge. In addition, READ and the Learning Assessment Platform provide technical assistance to a few countries to improve student learning assessments. In recent years, this support has more strategically focused on measurement in primary grades. The World Bank supported 143 operations that financed learning assessment, learning surveys, capacity building, and dissemination activities. In most cases, the assessments covered grades 6 and lower (92 percent) and evaluated reading (98 percent) and mathematics (84 percent).

Nevertheless, the World Bank needs to focus more consistently on learning outcomes at both the country and project levels. Of the 77 projects with PDOs that address improving learning outcomes, 48 have outcome indicators measuring learning outcomes. The reduced frequency in measurement of learning compared with outputs of the learning environment is due, in part, to internal incentives that do not encourage country teams or TTLs to set more ambitious objectives and indicators, which are more challenging to achieve than access-related objectives. Analysis of IEG ratings shows that operations with an objective to improve learning outcomes receive lower ratings than operations without such an objective, which is significant only at the 0.1 level. The lack of adequate measurement data was a factor in lower project ratings (Bedasso and Sandefur 2024). The same authors note that TTLs may account for a significant portion of the variations in type of project activities, suggesting a shortcoming in the institutional incentives needed to ensure TTLs support the World Bank’s strategic aim—learning for all—and do not feel pressure to deliver uniformly high ratings. The measurement of enhanced learning outcomes at country program level is also limited, and the efficacy of EMIS remains weak in many client countries despite World Bank operational support. Due attention is not always paid to interactions and interdependencies between technical and human components within basic education systems, which are necessary to support a joined-up, functioning model. In those instances, the EMIS assessment tool is not “internalized” and is therefore not a stable and reliable source for evidence-based policy making.

The measurement of progress in basic education and in tackling the learning crisis requires stronger measurement within the World Bank (beyond the new corporate indicator—learning poverty). Because the international community emphasizes the need for accountability from individual governments, it follows that the international community and the World Bank, as the primary external funder of education, also need to be accountable for learning outcomes and not just for outputs. Additional country program and project-level measurement is needed that tracks intermediate learning outcomes and provides evidence that more children are learning. The minimum proficiency level can be used as a foundation for an outcome-oriented World Bank approach in basic education. The planning scenarios for country programs and operations allow sufficient time to measure progress at third and sixth grades and track intermediate outcomes in education systems, including national assessment capacity and a teaching career framework.

Equity

The World Bank has enhanced its focus on equity-related matters central to ensuring learning for all. The quality of country-level analysis in the World Bank improved during FY12–22. Documentation (PADs and CPFs, for example), which had mostly referred only to gender, is increasingly inclusive of groups such as children with disabilities, out-of-school children, and displaced persons. Still, the adequacy of activities supported cannot be quantified because, beyond gender, the quantity and quality of disaggregated monitoring and reporting are limited. For example, the availability of disaggregated data in projects ranges from 91 percent for projects addressing gender disparity to 30 percent for projects addressing disability or out-of-school children. Thus, there is progress in recognizing barriers and targeting activities among multiple groups, but there is not enough attention on measuring equity (beyond gender and girls).

Global-level ASA document inequities in learning for various marginalized groups. Going forward, clients need support in and knowledge about the additional challenges faced by children with disabilities and the learning adaptations they may need for the delivery of education because this aspect has received modest attention. To maximize its contribution to addressing the learning crisis, the World Bank will need to lead the way in providing context-specific evidence and ensuring that equity is fully built into education system planning, implementation, and monitoring.

Support for Teaching Career Framework

World Bank support for teachers and teaching emphasized on-the-job training (80 percent of projects), with limited monitoring of the training or follow-up support, despite the emphasis on a comprehensive approach in analytic work. Such training can be valuable where a cadre of well-qualified teachers exists and where the training is designed to complement and build on existing knowledge, expertise, and competence (for example, to train teachers on new methodologies or on the rudiments of curricular change). However, only 40 out of 188 operations with on-the-job training included follow-up support as a discrete activity, and 70 included a continuous mechanism offering regular supervision. This is a design improvement from what IEG previously identified (World Bank 2019c); however, few of these operations will assess the follow-up support (38 out of the combined 110 operations).

The inadequacy of monitoring of teacher training in operations and ASA means that there is a lack of feedback on the efficacy of interventions. Twenty-two operations (out of 188 with on-the-job training) systematically tracked the impact of the training on teachers’ practices; participation in the training was monitored in the remaining operations. Given the high proportion of projects supporting training, the World Bank is missing an important opportunity to learn from operations and ensure that training is in fact improving the capabilities of teachers and resulting in better learning outcomes. There is also no evidence yet that Teach and Coach are effective in creating and sustaining improvements in teaching practices and student learning—evidence that country clients will need to continue to pursue such approaches in the absence of trust funds.

A more balanced approach to support for a teaching career framework is needed, consistent with the World Bank’s ASA developed over the decade. In many countries where the World Bank supports basic education, including those most affected by the learning crisis, the quality of initial teacher training is inadequate, qualified teachers are in short supply, the quality of teaching is inadequate, and motivation is an issue. Preservice training was a planned activity or subcomponent in 91 (39 percent) of all basic education projects approved during FY12–22. However, placing so much emphasis on one dimension of quality teaching—on-the-job training (a stock issue)—without significant attention to addressing the quality of the flow of teachers into basic education systems, is inefficient and misaligned with the World Bank ASA over the decade. The World Bank response needs to address the intertwined challenges and political economy barriers to teaching quality in a balanced way by also addressing initial training and through a career framework and better linking of training with career opportunities (Popova et al. 2018), which is a feature of leading education systems.

Support for Capacity Development across All Levels of the System

World Bank support for capacity development is focused on the central level, with less emphasis on capacity and delivery throughout the education system. Case studies found that the relationship with central government—ministries and key agencies (such as those involved in curriculum or assessment)—is a comparative advantage for the World Bank, allowing access to policy makers and influencing the broad trajectory of education policy. World Bank support for dedicated capacity building also tends to focus on the central level. Capacity building at lower levels of the system often supports the delivery of World Bank projects rather than the efficacy of the system itself—that is, the capacity of the local government or administration involved in education delivery. This can result in such interventions as the development of EMIS without ensuring capacity within the system to maximize its use to inform policy. IEG recognizes that the scale of the task—building systemwide capacity—is significant, but it is also necessary for longer-term development. IEG also recognizes that the World Bank cannot do the task alone, but it can, working with government, other stakeholders, and development partners, prioritize it to better support implementation fidelity and overall efficacy of delivery of education and enhanced learning outcomes.

Looking Ahead: Contributions to Learning

To address the learning crisis beyond 2030, the overall approach to basic education will require changes. Governments and other stakeholders, including donors, will have to prioritize basic education, guarantee access to quality learning opportunities, measure progress, and implement strategies to ensure that individuals acquire the skills they need to lead fulfilling lives and contribute to the prosperity of their communities and economies. The analysis by Azevedo et al. (2021) concludes that, at historically observed rates of progress, the goal of ensuring that all children can read by 2030 will not be reached3 —an early warning that remaining on the current path will not be good enough. Despite international recognition of the importance of ensuring learning for all (see chapter 3), the level of development assistance for education and, within that, for basic education, is modest. Countries experiencing significant population growth are challenged by growing demand for greater access to secondary education while also needing to improve learning in basic education. In many countries, World Bank support for basic education lacks intensity and continuity (see table A.4). In such places, the World Bank does not combine projects with other influence points in a sequenced engagement that would lead to incremental system reform, learning measurement, a teaching career framework, and improved learning for all. Without consistent and longer-term engagement, it is difficult to gain traction to support the systemic reform necessary to improve learning outcomes. If funding by the World Bank and international stakeholders remains constant (despite the growing challenges), lending and nonlending initiatives will need to become increasingly strategic in what they support and in which countries.

A core proposition of this evaluation is that support for the reform of basic education systems toward realizing learning for all requires country interventions calibrated to a systems analysis of basic education. Thorough analysis recognizes the unique political, social, cultural, and economic characteristics of individual basic education systems and facilitates the design and implementation of tailored responses, consistent with the call in the WDR 2018 to identify and address system failures for learning. Documentation at the country level suggests that support to basic education has taken a more uniform, less nuanced approach.

Country case studies found several weaknesses in the World Bank approach. For example, documentation rarely emphasized the potential impacts of dynamic interaction among multiple, potentially powerful stakeholders on the achievement of desired outcomes. The case studies also found no assessments of the alignment and capacity of the basic education delivery system, especially for actors in the lower levels of the system on whom fidelity to policy reform and implementation success depends. Analysis undertaken by the World Bank should take account of the level of political will in support of inclusive education reform, the level of financial commitment in support of reform, and the extent of capacity within and across the system. Such assessment may lead the World Bank to prioritize its lending for basic education in some countries and prioritize dialogue and capacity building in others.

Where it has a willing and committed partner, the World Bank has contributed to key policy reforms that have created a foundation for learning-oriented systems. The evaluation framework highlights several supporting conditions to implement learning for all. Case studies and literature identify political and social commitment as critical precursors. The evaluation also found that the momentum behind reform at the country level is a function of the financial investment in basic education and capacity to deliver—factors that vary from country to country. Examples from Brazil, Kenya, and Viet Nam show deliberate use of World Bank knowledge, technical assistance, policy dialogue, and financing to reform the education system in a manner that contributes to improvement in learning outcomes. The three countries have also provided adequate financial commitment and demonstrated high political commitment toward learning for all with a strong focus on equity.

The evaluation concludes that the World Bank is well placed to lead in delivering a more strategic response to the learning crisis and shifting to an outcome orientation. The World Bank has well-developed relationships with client governments that can be used to support reform in favor of learning for all. In addition, it has strong research and analytic capabilities and is the largest provider of development aid to education, putting it in an influential position in relation to other development partners. These comparative advantages provide leverage that can be used to reorient dialogue and support to focus on critical reforms to education systems—equity, teaching career framework, learning assessment system, and capacity across all levels of systems. A strategic response will require a shift from an output orientation to an outcome orientation. Stronger monitoring and evaluation will be required. Consistently examining whether what the World Bank finances is having a positive impact on systems, teaching, and measurement of learning is needed to provide a feedback loop, as depicted in the evaluation framework.

A stronger contribution would require better contextualized World Bank engagement that focuses on political commitment, public funding, and the education system’s capacity to deliver learning for all. Developing countries, regardless of type, are on different basic education reform trajectories. Hence, a thorough understanding of key factors affecting or potentially affecting reforms is necessary to best engage with and support basic education system reform. This requires going beyond isolated assessments of individual system pieces that are not functioning. To understand why education systems fail children, it is essential to analyze and understand the key driver in the learning for all reform trajectory—that is, the strength and depth of political commitment in favor of reform. Rhetorical acknowledgment of this finding appears in key documents, particularly in the WDR 2018 and in Ending Learning Poverty: What Will It Take? (World Bank 2019b), but it is rarely reflected in CPFs or PADs. The evaluation also found that the momentum behind reform at the country level is a function of the level of investment in basic education and capacity to deliver and that these factors vary from country to country. In that regard, a systems-based analysis would provide a lens through which to design a context-specific engagement strategy and associated interventions.4

There are signs that the World Bank and its partners are moving toward a systems focus, particularly at the global level. The Accelerator Program embraces systems reform among clients that show commitment to achieving results. Early lessons from the program show the need for flexibility as commitment wanes or context changes. Interviews conducted for the evaluation highlight that further motivating clients may require more resources than the Accelerator Program provides and may take additional time to coordinate—a constraint repeatedly noted in interviews. Among the factors that contributed to the World Bank’s influence with country clients were support for follow-up and the ability to link analytic support with implementation realities.

Given the limitations in the quantum of development aid that goes to basic education, more comprehensive approaches to addressing the learning crisis will also require a much greater level of collaboration among development partners. COVID-19 has spurred the emergence of greater collective urgency and innovation among partners, including the World Bank, particularly at the global level. At the country level, however, although partners communicate and cooperate, true collaboration is much more limited and is undermined by the absence of a widely shared understanding of the factors contributing to system failure. A common analysis and understanding could support the co-pursuit of quality education and learning outcomes and the co-pursuit of reform of teaching career framework and measurement of learning, as no leading education system has succeeded without these two critical aspects.

Recommendations

The evaluation makes two recommendations to promote an outcome focus in World Bank support to address key aspects to improve learning poverty at the country level.

Develop country-specific education engagement plans that include systems-based enhancements to the teaching framework to improve learning outcomes. These plans should be informed by a comprehensive systems analysis of the constraints to implementation of a career framework—teacher recruitment, training, development, motivation, and evaluation—as learning outcomes require capable and motivated teachers. Understanding the underlying issues, such as political will, system capacity, funding, and political economy obstacles and opportunities, will involve eliciting feedback from key stakeholders at all levels and compiling existing and new analysis to guide the development of a medium-term engagement process ideally anchored, where appropriate, within a pillar of the CPF. Sufficient data would be needed to inform adaptive management decisions related to corrective actions and learning during implementation to address the underlying constraints to sustainably improve systems and track intermediate outcomes. Implementation could be measured in CPFs, supported by analytics and projects, with intermediate outcomes related to the performance of the teaching career framework, rather than just the completion of activities. The success of the recommendation can also be measured in lessons that inform a scaling up of approaches from the World Bank’s engagement.

Collaborate with global and country partners to close the data gaps on learning outcomes (aligned with SDG target 4.1) and to track progress in ending learning poverty. This would be demonstrated by showing an increase in the number of countries with (i) education projects and CPFs that include indicators for learning improvements in grades 3 and 6, which may require more ambitious project goals and indicators; (ii) improvement in national educational assessment capabilities and systems for data collection and decision-making; and (iii) participation in cross-national assessments for better data comparability. A focus on those countries that lack quality national assessments and have not been part of international or regional assessments in the last five years is particularly needed.