Search

The study aims to understand the foremost challenges in the transition to online teaching and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study adopts the PRISMA approach to screening the selection of journal articles and review papers according to the research aims and the inclusion criteria. The journal articles and review papers were extracted and stored in Microsoft Excel and Google Scholar, Academic. Microsoft, Semantic Scholar, Elsevier, and Emerald Insight databases searched relevant documents using formulated keywords. A statistical technique was applied using the M.S. Excel analysis tool (PivotTable and an independent t-Test) to analyze data and determine the differences between teachers and students. The review revealed the evidence that the majority of the studies were primarily focused on the individual developing countries and results from other developing countries were not considered. In addition, the foremost challenges in the transition to online teaching and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic were inadequate skills and training, inadequate Internet/Infrastructure, lack of supporting resources and lack of online student engagement and feedback. Finally, the independent t-test reveals there is no statistically significant difference in challenges in the transition to online teaching and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Both teachers and students encounter similar challenges. The systematic review raised concerns that higher learning needs to effectively implement long term strategies and support teachers and students in getting into online teaching and learning.

Sanitation change continues to be on the forefront of the global development agenda, even as it is becoming clear that the targets established in the Sustainable Development Goals will not be met. But since improving access to safely managed sanitation facilities remains a cost-effective and impactful measure to improve people's lives, it is still important to assess currently implemented policies to be able to learn from best practices and to understand how different approaches work under different contexts. This paper provides comparative analysis of country-level policies in India and Ethiopia, two countries that achieved notable progress in eliminating open defecation through distinct sanitation strategies, with the aim of confronting the advantages and disadvantages of both approaches. While in India the primary emphasis has been on the supply-side, i.e., provision of subsidized sanitation infrastructure, Ethiopian strategy prioritized the demand-side by addressing change in sanitation behavior through Community Total Led Sanitation. The analysis shows that neither of the strategies can fully achieve the sanitation change and a combination of both seems to be the most impactful approach in combating open defecation. It also argues that policymakers must consider not only local socioeconomic and budgetary constraints but also historical, institutional, sociocultural, and geographical specifics in deciding what type of subsidies would be the most fitting. At the same time, they also need to address the appropriate social norms to achieve the desirable change in sanitation behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To estimate incremental costs of an implementation model for scaling up Kangaroo Mother Care (KMC) for neonates with birthweight <2000 g. Methods: Seven sites across Ethiopia and India collected data for 2018–19 to calculate incremental recurrent costs (of health worker time, supplies, and operations) and start‐up costs for KMC scale up. The costs were estimated per live newborn <2000 g eligible for KMC identified in the study population. Results: Scaling up KMC in study districts required average incremental costs of US$59 (95% CI US$ 52–67) in Ethiopia and US$72 (95% CI US$ 41–103) in India per eligible newborn in the population. Most of these costs were recurrent; the annualised start‐up costs per eligible newborn ranged from 12%–25% of total costs in Ethiopia and 9%–16% in India. The major cost driver was human resources, followed by initial and recurrent training, supplies, and communications costs. Incremental infrastructure costs were only 2%–6% of total costs in both countries. Most of the costs were for activities at the KMC implementing facility, accounting for 79%–88% of the total costs in Ethiopia and 89%–93% of those in India. Conclusion: The costs for successful scale up of KMC seem affordable but must be included in programme budgets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]