D.3     Identify the beneficiary schools

D.3.1    Mapping

In the context of school connectivity, mapping indicates which schools are online, and their proximity to key infrastructure inputs such as optical-fibre and electricity. This in turn enables countries to properly scope and design their solutions, choose effective business models and prepare appropriate budgets. Mapping is critical to ensure that the request for proposals leads to an evidence-based selection of technical partners.

Effective mapping requires:

  • credible and up-to-date data on school connectivity from a number of different institutions and at local as well as national levels (see Giga mapping pillar); (Y/N)
  • school connectivity data overlayed with other data sets to identify trends and possible solutions (e.g., overlaying with Internet service providers on coverage maps, overlaying electricity grid, overlaying fibre-optic networks and BTS locations); (Y/N)
  • that can enable repeat data collection, which in turn enables meaningful comparison and progress measurement. (Y/N)

Countries should where possible document and measure the information in the following tables at the outset of the project, and then periodically. The best way to do this is via mapping / GIS, which provides a good visual analysis of the situation and the gaps. There is a need to map (1) infrastructure; (2) socio-economic baseline data; and (3) forecasts/ scenarios.


Download tool

D.3.2    Baseline research

While it is tempting to jump into the design and development of a digital learning ecosystem, taking the time to gather information about the number of schools that need to be connected, their location, their general and the individual needs is a critical step to ensuring that a programme will meet the needs of all schools and students. Public consultation on this research is important to understand future roll-out plans, socio-economic issues and any other local nuances, and to get buy-in.

Example stakeholder groups to engage

  • Teachers, principals, administrators
  • Traditional and community leaders
  • Religious leader
  • Parents and guardians

Baseline research, where possible combined with scenario planning and complemented by mapping, forms the basis for the school connectivity programme. It provides guidance on programme minimum requirements, and how to address potential biases or preconceived notions that may exist. Without a needs analysis, the solution will not be evidence-based and therefore may not be directly relevant to the challenges or gaps that exist on the ground.

Once the information about coverage and infrastructure has been mapped, and the associated socio-economic context understood, key decisions about the nature of the school connectivity programme and its beneficiaries can be taken. Coverage does not imply connectivity and as such once coverage is established, answers will be needed:

  • Does a coverage gap need to be closed?
  • What is the nature of the gap? Last mile / access network? Backhaul? Devices?
  • Is there sufficient coverage (e.g. 2G)? It should be noted that not all technologies are created equal. The national targets will have defined minimum download speeds for meaningful connection (e.g. 10 Mbit/s with an upload speed of 2.5 Mbit/s in the United States). As a target, each school may advise for double the minimum download and upload speed, as is the approach for Giga projects.
  • Is there sufficient coverage (i.e. no coverage gap), but still no connectivity? In this case, issues such as affordability, digital literacy, access to electricity or lack of digital inclusion may be issues.

The coverage gap decision tree below sets out the various scenarios that could arise from baseline research and mapping.

Coverage gap decision tree