880,000 in the 9<sup>th</sup> grade, and 330,000 in the 12<sup>th</sup> grade. In addition, NIETS administers the National Test, a standardized test given to 3<sup>rd</sup> and 6<sup>th</sup> grade students. Local school systems administer their own tests to students in grades 2, 5 and 8. NIETS also administers two tests used to screen students for admission to the university: the General Aptitude Test (GAT) and the Professional and Academic Aptitude Test (PAT). These tests are given to students in Grade 12. The results of O-NET are published online, although the averages published without login-in are for the national level only.

In general, the principals’ assessment of policy implementation for this indicator is generally lower than the _Advanced_ score found in policy intent (Table 5). The lower score given by school principals may reflect the issues of reliability and validity, which lack meaningful analysis of test scores, or the low use of the results for making pedagogical and personnel adjustments because the school may exercise limited autonomy in these areas. It is important to point out that there is substantial room for improvement in the implementation of current school and student assessment policies. The qualifications to the existing system expressed by school principals reduce the rating of this sub-indicator to _Established_ , reflecting that the value of the indicator is near the Advanced level.

# **4.5 School Accountability to Stakeholders**

Accountability is at the heart of school-based management. The systemic connection between budgetary and personnel autonomy, parent participation in the financial and operational aspects of the school, and the measurement of learning outcomes are all aimed to reinforce accountability. Only by being accountable to parents can education quality be sustainable. The following indicators address the aspects of accountability that can be implemented within the framework of school-based management: the presence of written guidelines for the use of the results of school and student assessments; the strength of national institutions in charge of school and student assessments; the use of analytical comparisons to inform the public and education stakeholders about the performance of schools and students; the rights of school councils to request financial audits; and the presence of written guidelines for the school council with which to assess school financial performance.

The indicator of school accountability has five sub-indicators:

- a. School has guidelines for using school and student assessments for accountability

- b. There are national and/or regional systems for educational assessment

- c. There are reports with comparisons of school and student performance

- d. School Councils have legal authority to ask for financial audits

- e. There are manuals for the participation of the School Council on school audits

The results of the assessment of policy intent are mixed. Two sub-indicators received an _Emerging_ score: the presence of guidelines for interpreting school and student assessments, and the legal authority for school councils to request an audit also. Two other sub-indicators got an _Advanced_ score: the national system for assessing schools and students, and the presence of an audit manual for school councils. School boards do not have direct legal authority to ask for financial audits to enforce financial transparency and accountability, but can request the office of the Auditor General to perform one. Still, school accountability is hampered by the lack of 17