Both concepts aim for the same goal – to strengthen the quality of school activities and focus on student progress, but they offer different paths: to improve the expert evaluation-based model or to move towards continuous, data-driven monitoring of the progress of all schools in the country. In other words, the first concept proposes a system transformation, the second – a system renewal. However, it is agreed that external evaluation should primarily encourage the school’s own responsibility for the quality of its activities.
“At this stage, it is important to hear how the school communities themselves see meaningful external evaluation. Both alternatives raise the same fundamental question – how to turn evaluation into a tool not for control, but for school improvement and timely support. Therefore, we invite the education community to evaluate not only individual elements of the proposed models, their direction, but also how each concept could best serve the improvement of school quality. We will be waiting for proposals for the concepts until the end of October,” says Simonas Šabanovas, head of the National Education Agency.
The change in external evaluation and public consultations were initiated by the Ministry of Education, Science and Sports.
The first concept – the National School Progress Monitoring and External Evaluation Model “Child at the Center” – foresees that when changing the school evaluation system, the main focus should be not on control, but on each child’s achievement progress and psychological well-being. The quality of school activities would be evaluated according to three areas: students’ academic achievements, their dynamics, and the school’s contribution to student achievements.
The model proposes abandoning periodic evaluator visits as the main evaluation tool, and evaluators would become consultants helping schools plan and implement activity improvements. This model would create conditions to strengthen school autonomy. The main tool would be a progress dashboard for all Lithuanian schools, allowing real-time monitoring of collected data, analyzing it, and using it to improve activity quality.
Read more Against the backdrop of hostile US policies, Mark Carney seeks closer Canadian ties with Europe
The second alternative – the General Education Schools’ External Quality Evaluation Concept – is focused on strengthening the schools’ self-assessment and quality culture. According to this model, the quality of school activities would be evaluated according to four areas: leadership and governance, educational content, learning environments and partnerships, and community experience.
Evaluation would take into account not only student achievements but also the well-being, inclusion, collaboration of students and staff, the school context, and the progress it creates. Expert external evaluation would be based on the school’s self-assessment report. Artificial intelligence and digital technologies would be auxiliary tools for data analysis, but final decisions would still be made by specialists and school communities.
In both concepts, successful schools are characterized not only by students’ academic achievements but also by their emotional and psychological well-being. It is emphasized that school activities and their results cannot be evaluated separately from the social, economic, and cultural context. Both alternatives also foresee wider use of already collected data, modern digital technologies, and artificial intelligence, as well as reducing administrative burden.
The education community, social partners, and other stakeholders are invited not only to familiarize themselves with both concepts but also to submit their opinions, comments, and proposals for their improvement and implementation by October 30, 2026.
Read more Mushrooms can grow in your yard too: the most important condition
