annex c. right to education...2.7 (1,500/541) in 2020. there is also an increase in the development...

1

Annex C. Right to education

Link to the following SDGs:

1. Education in the Republic of Moldova before the COVID-19 pandemic

Education is a priority for the Republic of Moldova. The commitments assumed by the country in the

context of SDG4 confirm that education is seen as a precondition for advancement in all social and

economic sectors of the country1.

The Voluntary National Review (VNR) of the Republic of Moldova highlighted the improvement in

gross enrolment rates, including of children from vulnerable groups2. The quality of education also

registered slight improvements, as the results of the Program for International Student Assessment

(PISA) show: the scores for all subjects are increasing and the proportion of students who did not reach

the minimum level of competence is falling3. Still, students in Moldova scored lower than the

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average in reading, mathematics

and science4.

At the same time, the PISA5 results highlight inequalities related to socio-economic status, gender and

residence. The socio-economically advantaged students outperformed disadvantaged students.

Students from disadvantaged groups had limited educational aspirations: only 22% of the poorest

students wanted to enrol at university, compared to 77% of students with higher incomes6. Also,

students from rural areas were less ambitious for their further education than their peers from cities:

only 35% of students from rural areas, compared to 60% from urban areas intended to graduate from

university. Girls performed better than boys in the majority of PISA fields7.

Existing data shows limited availability of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in

educational institutions. According to data from the National Bureau of Statistics, schools from across

the country are endowed with approximately 32,501 computers, out of which 28,500 are used for

teaching purposes, with around 24,000 of them being over 5 years old and in need of replacement to

conform with the standards adopted by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Research (MECR) in

20158.

Despite some progress, inequalities persist in the education system with regards to access to quality

education for children in vulnerable situations.

1 Government of the Republic of Moldova, Voluntary National Review, Progress Report 2020, available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/26346VNR_2020_Moldova_Report_English.pdf 2 Ibid, Figure 14, page 47 3 Ibid, Figure 16, page 50 4 Program for International Students Assessment for 2018, Moldova, available at: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA2018_CN_MDA.pdf, p. 1 5 Program for International Students Assessment for 2018, Moldova, available at: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA2018_CN_MDA.pdf, p. 4 6 Government of the Republic of Moldova, Voluntary National Review 7 PISA fields: reading, mathematics and science. 8 UN coordinated Education Task Force for COVID-19, Education and COVID-19 in the Republic of Moldova, available at: https://moldova.un.org/sites/default/files/2020-09/Working%20Paper%20Education%20and%20COVID-19%20in%20the%20Republic%20of%20%20Moldova_FINAL_English%20version.pdf

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/26346VNR_2020_Moldova_Report_English.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA2018_CN_MDA.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA2018_CN_MDA.pdf

https://moldova.un.org/sites/default/files/2020-09/Working%20Paper%20Education%20and%20COVID-19%20in%20the%20Republic%20of%20%20Moldova_FINAL_English%20version.pdf


2

A total number of 9800 children with Special Education Needs (SEN), including 1500 children with

disabilities, having been included in the mainstream educational system in 2020 to 2021 school year9,

marks an improvement in the access to education of children with SEN. The ratio of children with

disabilities in regular schools to those in special schools increased from 1.9 (1,425/749) in 2017 and to

2.7 (1,500/541) in 2020. There is also an increase in the development of support services for inclusive

education10 and progress has been made in ensuring initial and in-service training of teachers in

inclusive education. However, barriers11 still exist that impede the access to education, especially in

case of children with severe and multiple, intellectual and psycho-social as well as sensory disabilities

such as lack of/limited accessibility of infrastructure of educational institutions12 and transportation13;

limited access to assistive technologies and equipment; limited access to support services14; limited

capacities of teachers to work with this category of children; persistence of bullying and stigma among

peers.

The educational inclusion of Roma children remains a problem15. At all education levels, the

attendance rate of Roma children is much lower than that of the general population of children.

Stigma and discrimination affect the enrolment and school attendance of Roma children, who in

average enter the educational system later and leave it earlier than others do. Only every second

Roma child is enrolled in primary and secondary education as opposed to the majority (90 per cent)

of non-Roma children. They also drop out of school significantly more often than their non-Roma

peers16.

2. The impact of the pandemic on the right to education

a. Availability of education during the Covid-19 pandemic period

i. Structural and process related aspects

As a response to the COVID-19 outbreak, all the public and private educational institution were

physically closed and the educational process suspended17 from 11 to 23 March 2020. Around 434,000

students had to connect to distance education18.

9 Data of the National Bureau of Statistics for 2020/2021 school year. Statistical publication available at: https://statistica.gov.md/newsview.php?l=ro&idc=168&id=6862 10 The support services include 989 support teachers and 917 Resource Centres in Inclusive Education created within schools. 11 Highlighted in the Joint evaluation of the implementation of the inclusive education program conducted by UNICEF and Ministry of

Education, Culture and Research in 2019, available at: https://www.unicef.org/moldova/media/5166/file/Joint%20evaluation%20of%20implementation%20of%20the%20Programme%20for%20Development%20of%20Inclusive%20Education%202011%E2%80%932020%20.pdf, and by the national stakeholders in the field during the consultation conducted by UNCT Moldova in September 2020 in the context of development of Disability Theory of Change, with the participation of governmental institutions, NHRIs and 36 Organizations of Persons with Disabilities and NGOs 12 The administrative data from local public administrations as of 1 October 2020 shows that only 24 per cent of mainstream educational institutions have sanitary facilities adapted to the needs of children with disabilities. 13 UNICEF and Ministry of Education, Culture and Research, p. 58 14 This refers to: limited numbers of support teachers and resource centres in schools; the lack or insufficiency of psychological, psycho-

pedagogical, speech-language services in educational institutions, UNICEF and Ministry of Education, Culture and Research, p. 58 15 Government of the Republic of Moldova, Voluntary National Review 16 UNICEF Moldova, Roma children. Inclusion and reintegration of Roma children into the education system, available at: https://www.unicef.org/moldova/en/what-we-do/roma-children 17 Order of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Research nr. 292 from 10.03.2020 on suspending the educational process in educational

institutions 18 UN Coordinated Education Task Force for COVID-19 in Moldova, Thematic paper “Education and COVID-19 in Moldova: Grasping the opportunity the learning crisis presents to build a more resilient education system”, available at: https://moldova.un.org/sites/default/files/2020-09/Working%20Paper%20Education%20and%20COVID-19%20in%20the%20Republic%20of%20%20Moldova_FINAL_English%20version.pdf

https://statistica.gov.md/newsview.php?l=ro&idc=168&id=6862

https://www.unicef.org/moldova/media/5166/file/Joint%20evaluation%20of%20implementation%20of%20the%20Programme%20for%20Development%20of%20Inclusive%20Education%202011%E2%80%932020%20.pdf

https://www.unicef.org/moldova/media/5166/file/Joint%20evaluation%20of%20implementation%20of%20the%20Programme%20for%20Development%20of%20Inclusive%20Education%202011%E2%80%932020%20.pdf



3

To ensure the continuity of the educational process during the lockdown, the Ministry of Education

Culture and research (MECR), supported by development partners, developed a COVID-19

preparedness and response plan and approved a number of normative acts, methodologies and

regulations for remote learning,19 mandating all the educational institutions at all levels to provide

distance learning opportunities. Among the regulations approved are the following: Methodology on

the Remote Organization of the Educational Process in Conditions of Quarantine in the Primary,

Middle school and High school education20; Methodology for Organizing Distance Education Process

for Early Education Institutions21; Instruction on the Organisation of Remote Learning for Children with

Disabilities (Order no. 1934 from 28.12.2018)22; Instruction on the Management of Home Assignments

in Primary, Middle School and High school education (Order no. 22 august 2018)23; Instruction on the

organisation of psychological assistance for children/students, parents and teaching staff for the

period of suspension of the educational process (Order nr. 380 from 26.03.2020)24; Methodological

Guidelines on Maintaining a Healthy Lifestyle during the Quarantine25.

From the beginning of the state of emergency, MECR urged the teachers and all the educational

community to show responsibility and solidarity and to organize an efficient management of the

distance learning process. An on-line campaign “I am responsible26: my class is at home” was launched

by the MoECR to support the teachers, parents and students in the distance education process.

Pre-school facilities were closed, affecting both children and parents, primarily mothers. All

kindergartens were closed during the period 11 March – 15 August 2020, with only a few of them,

mostly private kindergartens, providing remote education during the aforementioned period. In the

absence of institutional support and public services, the care activities moved automatically to the

household members, particularly to women, thus starting a real care-related crisis and pressure. 27

The widespread closure of schools deepened inequalities and broadened the learning gap between

children who had resources, access to computers and internet networks and those in overcrowded

accommodation, living in informal settlements or remote areas and those with disabilities who

required adapted materials28. The lockdown also generated additional risks, which had an impact on

the most vulnerable, including households in vulnerable situation, household with many children29,

19 All developments related to policy documents can be seen here: https://mecc.gov.md/ro/content/invatamint-general 20 Methodology approved by the Order of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Research nr. 351 from 19.03.2020, available at: https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/ordin_mecc_metodologia_invatamant_dis tanta.pdf?fbclid=IwAR34rYKyQLpQrKbgKvdLXBbMzhzxNexex26ixYelUtD5Nu-8WaHNZkRS04M 21 Methodology approved by the Order of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Researh nr. 378 from 26.03.303, available at: https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/metodologie_la_distanta_iet_378.pdf 22 Instruction on Organization Remote Education for Children with Disabilities available at: https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/anexa_la_ordinul_nr._1934_din_28.12.2018.pdf 23 Instruction available at: https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/instructiune_teme_pentru_acasa.pdf 24 Instruction available at: https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/instructiune_asistenta_psihologica.pdf 25 Methodological guideline available at: https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/repere_metodologice_mecc_v0.1_cc.pdf 26 https://mecc.gov.md/ro/content/ministerul-educatie i-culturii-si-cercetarii-lansat-campania-sunt-responsabil-clasa-mea-e 27 CPD (2020). (INVISIBLE) CARE CRISIS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: Assessment of the pandemic crisis impact on the gender roles in care and women empowerment, p.4 28 OHCHR internal document, Ensuring human rights in the Republic of Moldova in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Report on the

analysis of the questionnaires of civil society organizations, members of the Working Group on COVID-19 and Human Rights, created at the initiative of the UN Human Rights Office in Moldova 29 CCF-Moldova, Research on the situation of families with children at risk in the context of the pandemic caused by coronavirus, av ailable at: https://ccfmoldova.org/new/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Research-on-the-situation-of-families-affected-by-the-pandemic.pdf, June 2020

https://mecc.gov.md/ro/content/invatamint-general

https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/ordin_mecc_metodologia_invatamant_distanta.pdf?fbclid=IwAR34rYKyQLpQrKbgKvdLXBbMzhzxNexex26ixYelUtD5Nu-8WaHNZkRS04M


https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/metodologie_la_distanta_iet_378.pdf

https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/anexa_la_ordinul_nr._1934_din_28.12.2018.pdf

https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/instructiune_asistenta_psihologica.pdf

https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/repere_metodologice_mecc_v0.1_cc.pdf

https://mecc.gov.md/ro/content/ministerul-educatiei-culturii-si-cercetarii-lansat-campania-sunt-responsabil-clasa-mea-e

https://ccfmoldova.org/new/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Research-on-the-situation-of-families-affected-by-the-pandemic.pdf

4

Roma30, persons with disabilities31, including the disruption of access to food for children32 and

increased economic costs for parents due to the need to ensure the necessary devices for their

children. School closures resulted in the disruption of education, an increased risk of economic

exploitation and abuse33, and most likely additional burdens on girls since they may have been

expected to take on increased care work at home34.

Central public authorities gave priority to private institutions

On 24 July 2020, the Extraordinary Commission on Public Health (ECPH) decided to suspend the

educational process, except the admission process, for the general education institutions, and

professional and university education for both public and private institutions. 35

Subsequently, on 15 August 2020, the ECPH adopted a new decision that stipulated, by derogation

from Decision no. 21 from 24.07.2020, to resume education within private pre-school education

institutions, in case of compliance with the official requirements in the context of the COVID-19

pandemic.36 This decision led to negative reactions from the side of parents whose children were

attending public institutions37.

Later on 26 August 2020, it was decided38 that the educational institutions of all levels, public and

private, including kindergartens could re-open on 1 September 2020 for in-person attendance in case

of compliance with the respective instruction39.

On 23 October 2020 the Equality Council found that the restriction on public pre-school education

institutions had been disproportionate in relation to the pursued goal. There was no evidence that

public institutions would not be able to comply with official requirements. The decision amounted to

discrimination on the ground of wealth.

On the Left bank, according to the available data the total number of children aged 0-18 slightly decreased (approx. 0.4%) from 76,453 in 2019 to 76,158 in 2020. At the same time, the de-facto Ministry of education reports that there has been a stable annual increase in the number of children who attended schools for the last 5 years (from 44,547 in 2016 to 45,386 in 2021), and an increase by 232 pupils from 2019 (prior to pandemic) to 2020 (during COVID-19 restrictions).

Starting from 16 March 2020 the educational process was suspended in all educational institutions,

regardless of the organizational form and form of ownership, which was resumed in an online format

starting from 1 April 2020. On 3 April 2020, each educational institution was recommended to choose

the appropriate model of delivering distance learning education to students by approving a local

regulatory document and according to the Informational Technologies (IT) technical capabilities of

each school to “organise training sessions, consultations, webinars using various electronic

educational resources (school websites, other platforms)”. The character of the issued

30 Roma Voice Coalition, Report on monitoring the action plan for supporting Roma people from the Republic of Moldova for the period 2016 – 2020, available at:

https://www.academia.edu/43580477/Raport_de_Monitorizare_Plan_Actiuni_Romi_Moldova_I_jum_anul_2020_Educatie 31 UN Education Task Force, Policy bried, p. 3 32 Ibid, p. 3 33 UN Women Moldova, Assessment of COVID-19 impact on gender roles, available at: https://www2.unwomen.org/-

/media/field%20office%20moldova/attachments/publications/2020/un%20woman%20en%20240820.pdf?la=en&vs=38, June 2020 34 UN Education Task Force, Policy brief, p. 5 35 ECPH Decision no. 21 from 24.07.2020, pt. 3.5 36 ECPH Decision no. 25 from 15.08.2020, pt. 1 37 Jurnal.md, available at: https://www.jurnal.md/ro/news/f3df6da82f4c78b3/gradinitele-private-se-redeschid-alo-guvernul-noi-cei-care-

nu-avem-bani-sa-mergem-la-privat-ce-facem.html, Deschide.md: https://deschide.md/ro/stiri/social/70838/NEWS-ALERT--Gr%C4%83dini%C8%9Bele-private-%C3%AE%C8%99i-vor-re lua-activitatea-din-data-de-17-august.htm 38 ECPH Decision no. 26 from 21.08.2020, 39 Ibid, annex of the ECPH Decision no 26 from 21.08.2020

https://www2.unwomen.org/-/media/field%20office%20moldova/attachments/publications/2020/un%20woman%20en%20240820.pdf?la=en&vs=38

https://www2.unwomen.org/-/media/field%20office%20moldova/attachments/publications/2020/un%20woman%20en%20240820.pdf?la=en&vs=38

https://www.jurnal.md/ro/news/f3df6da82f4c78b3/gradinitele-private-se-redeschid-alo-guvernul-noi-cei-care-nu-avem-bani-sa-mergem-la-privat-ce-facem.html

https://www.jurnal.md/ro/news/f3df6da82f4c78b3/gradinitele-private-se-redeschid-alo-guvernul-noi-cei-care-nu-avem-bani-sa-mergem-la-privat-ce-facem.html

5

recommendations was rather broad, especially considering that staff from the educational institutions

were not prepared and did not have any experience of such methods of education. Reportedly, for

example, students of one class were on the same day asked to follow their educational classes through

various platforms (eg viber, zoom, google meet, etc.).

There is no information available on whether educational staff were offered courses to develop their

IT skills and the model of delivering online classes, including for children with special needs.

Knowledge progress monitoring assessments for students from schools and vocational educational

institutions, which were usually done through end-line exams, were replaced by assessments based

on the current performance and grades received for the educational year 2019-2020.

During the summer period (June to August 2020), more detailed guidance and regulations were

approved to prepare for the upcoming educational year 2020-2021: Regulation on the procedure for

implementation of educational programs in educational institutions using e-learning and distance

learning technologies from 16.07.2020; on the organization of work for educational organizations and

organizations with permanent residence of students in the context of COVID-19 from 22.07.2020;

Methodological recommendations on organizing educational lessons using e-learning and distance

learning technologies from 07.08.2020; Regulation on the organization of the educational process in

educational institutions for the year 2020-2021 with the risks of the COVID-19 spreading from

20.08.2020; separate chapter on distance learning education with different guidance materials and

normative acts was placed on the internet-page of the de-facto ministry of education.

On 17 March 2020 pre-school facilities were closed and one caregiver per child (ultimately this was

predominantly the woman) was entitled to take certified paid leave until preschool institutions were

once again opened. On 20 July 2020 several kindergartens from Tiraspol, Bendery, Rybnita and

Slobodzia region resumed their work in a test mode (not more than 13 children were accepted to one

group), if the respective institution complied with the epidemiological requirements and all staff had

passed COVID-19 tests. Children from 3 years of age were accepted to the pre-school institution if

both parents could confirm their employment through a document from the employer. While by 13

August there were locations where none of the kindergartens had started their work (i.e. in Dubasari

town). By the end of August 2020 almost all pre-school institutions in urban and rural regions had

opened.

ii. Perceptions of the rights holders

Limited availability of digital devices to organize the distance education process. For 24.4% of respondents there was insufficient equipment to facilitate access to on-line education, and 10.3% did not have any equipment according to OHCHR’s survey. On the Left bank, 77.6% had sufficient devices, 14.3% had an insufficient number of devices and 6.1% had no devices at all.

Some differences are highlighted in access to digital devices related to socio-economic status,

education level and residence:

● only 48.2% (63,6% in Transnistria region) of respondents with low socio-economic status had

sufficient devices to ensure the education process of their children, compared to 72% (79.3%

in the Transnistria region) of respondents with high socio-economic status.

● the higher the education level of the respondents was, the higher was the marked rate of ICT

availability: 69.2% (81% in the Transnistria region) of respondents with high education had

sufficient devices versus 45.1% (66,7% in the Transnistria region) of respondents in case of

respondents with general education.

● access to digital devises was lower in rural area: 26% (8,3% in the Transnistria region) of

respondents from rural area compared to 22.7% (16,2% in the Transnistria region) from urban

6

area did not have sufficient devices. 11.9% (16, 7% in the Transnistria region) of respondents

from rural area compared to 8.5% (2,7% in the Transnistria region) from urban area did not

have any device.

b. Accessibility of education during the Covid-19 pandemic period


Besides the general framework, the Instructions on the organisation of remote learning for children with disabilities (Order no. 1934 from 28.12.2018) was used by the educational institution as a basis for organizing the education process of children with disabilities.

The aim of the adopted normative acts was to facilitate access to education for all, and the developed

methodology foresaw the responsibility of institutions to develop an individual education plan for

students, including those with Special Education Needs (SEN), who did not have access to ICT.

However, in practice some groups of children were left behind. This was the case for children with

disabilities40, Roma children41, as well as children from vulnerable families and children living in

poverty and families with more than one child of school age42.

A crucial element for ensuring the accessibility of the education process during the pandemic was and

remains the access to digital devices that would facilitate the connection to on-line classes: Firstly,

there is a low internet penetration rate, which stands in Moldova at around 79.9%43. Secondly, there

is limited access to ICT technologies (laptop, tablet, smartphone or internet) both, for students and

teachers. 16,000 students (4.8% of total) did not have the necessary gadgets and 3,000 teachers

(10.6% of total) did not enjoy access to ICT44. Ensuring access to ICT became a priority of the education

system in Moldova. According to available data, at the beginning of the lockdown 92.8% of the

students were involved in the distance education process. After a month, due to the efforts of the

MoECR45 and of development partners46, the percentage of students who participated in the

educational process increased to 95.6%47. For ensuring access to ICT for teachers and students, in 2020

the Government allocated 20 million MDL from the state budget to the MoECR. The Ministry of

Education is also continuously collecting data from the regions with regards to the number of teachers

and students who do not have ICTs48.

In the Transnistria region, reportedly families living in poverty, families from vulnerable groups with

several children, Roma children, and families with children with disability experienced issues in

accessing IT devices that would facilitate the connection to on-line classes. In December 2020, as a

response measure to cover the needs of 1,000 families with children from vulnerable groups (families

with three and more children, families with a child with disability or child with parents who both have

a disability, single parents) the left-bank authorities issued a special support program according to

40 Alliance of Organization of Persons with Disabilities and Keystone International in Moldova, Impact of Covid-19 pandemic on persons with disabilities: sociological study, available at: http://aopd.md/impactul-pandemiei-covid-19-asupra-persoanelor-cu-dizabilitati-s tudiu-sociologic/ p. 26 41 Roma voice coalition report 42 CCF-Moldova, Research on the situation of families with children at risk in the context of the pandemic caused by coronavirus, av ailable at: https://ccfmoldova.org/new/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Research-on-the-situation-of-families-affected-by-the-pandemic.pdf, June 2020 43 For EU countries the internet penetration for 2019 was 90% 44 UN Coordinated Education Task Force for COVID-19 in Moldova, Policy brief 45 20 million MDL were allocated by the Government for purchasing ICT in order to equip general and high school education institutions. 46 UNICEF, Soros-Foundation, Pestalozzi Children’s Foundation, etc. 47 Pavel Cerbusca, Remote mainstream education: efficacy and efficiency, see: https://ipp.md/wp-

content/uploads/2020/05/Studiu__Invatamantul_Online_202-04-29.pdf , 7 48 In letter number 05-17/1-03 from 02.06.2021 the Ministry of Finance informed OHCHR that the MoECR was continuously collecting data from the regions on the number of students and teachers who had not yet had ICT including through a radiography of endowment of the education institutions with ICT..

http://aopd.md/impactul-pandemiei-covid-19-asupra-persoanelor-cu-dizabilitati-studiu-sociologic/

http://aopd.md/impactul-pandemiei-covid-19-asupra-persoanelor-cu-dizabilitati-studiu-sociologic/

https://ccfmoldova.org/new/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Research-on-the-situation-of-families-affected-by-the-pandemic.pdf

https://ipp.md/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Studiu__Invatamantul_Online_202-04-29.pdf

https://ipp.md/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Studiu__Invatamantul_Online_202-04-29.pdf

7

which families could obtain a soft loan for 3 years for the purchase of a computer. Among other

support measures, children could go to a school and participate in distance learning from the school

computer following all epidemiological rules, and in some municipalities (in Bendery town) the

administration procured tablets and leased them to families, where digital devices were missing.


The availability of ICT devices influenced the level of attendance of on-line classes: while 71.1% (71, 4% in the Transnistria region) of the respondents of the OHCHR survey stated that their children participated in all on-line classes, 17.1% (18.4% in the Transnistria region) of respondents highlighted that their children attended some of the on-line classes and 8.3% (8, 2% in the Transnistria region) did not attend any on-line classes at all. This share is similar to the share of respondents who mentioned they lacked ICT devices (24.4% and 10.3% respectively). Unequal attendance of the on-line classes was highlighted with regards to gender, socio-economic status, level of education and location of residence:

● Lower rates of students from rural area (69.3%) participated in on-line classes compared to

students from urban areas (73.1%);

● The lower the economic status, the lower was the participation in all on-line classes (62.2%

of children with a low economic status participated in all on-line classes compared to 76% of

children from a high economic status);

● The higher the level of education of the respondents/parents was, the higher was the rate of

participation in on-line classes of children: 81.7% in case of VET education of parents and

70.6% in case of higher education, while for respondents with incomplete education this rate

was 63.4% and for general education 62.2%.

● In the Transnistria region, the biggest discrepancy was between children from urban (21,6%)

and rural (8,3%) areas that participated in classes on several subjects, not all of them.

The data of the OHCHR survey supports the data provided by the E-Government Agency (June 2020)

that presents lower internet penetration rate in rural areas (74.5% household internet connection in

rural areas versus 86.1% in urban areas), families with lower level of education (64.7% internet

connection rate among people with secondary incomplete education, compared to 94% among those

with higher education), and households with low income level (56.7% internet connectivity among

those with an income under 3,000 lei, compared to 96.5% in households with over 6,000 lei/month)49.

Income seems to be a determining factor as to whether children have access to online education.

c. Acceptability of education during the Covid-19 pandemic period

I. Structural and process related aspects

The state’s methodology for organizing the distance educat ion process foresees a number of responsibilities for parents: to cooperate with the educational institutions to ensure the education process of their children, to ensure a friendly educational environment, to ensure the participation of the child in classes based on the school program, to ensure the availability of the necessary materials and equipment, to monitor the involvement in the activity, and ensuring the alternation of intellectual activities with activities for motor and physical, emotional, spiritual development50.

49 UN Coordinated Education Task Force for COVID-19 in Moldova, Thematic paper, p. 4 50 Methodology for organizing the distance education process in lock-down conditions, point 2.6 Attributions of parents/legal representatives, https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/ordin_mecc_metodologia_invatamant_dis tanta.pdf?fbclid=IwAR34rYKyQLpQrKbgKvdLXBbMzhzxNexex26ixYelUtD5Nu-8WaHNZkRS04M



8

As a means of support for parents, at the beginning of the school year 2020/2021, the “Parents’ Handbook: What Can You Do to Support Your Child Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic?” was developed by MoECR, UNICEF and Child Community and Family-Moldova (CCF-Moldova) NGO in Romanian and Russian languages. The purpose of the handbook was to give clear answers to the most frequently asked questions by parents/legal representatives on the resumption of classes in educational institutions across the country51. Also, MoECR adopted a policy on the organization of psychological assistance for children/pupils, parents and teachers during the suspension of the educational process52. Subsequently programmes for psychological assistance for young people, parents and educational actors were launched53.

II. Perceptions of the rights holders

Parents faced difficulties in supporting the education process of their children . For 47.7% of the respondents of the Right bank, it was difficult to ensure distance learning of their child/children, while 7.1% could not organize it at all. This share was greater among respondents from rural areas (57.6% rural and 36.7% urban). At the same time a greater share of respondents from urban areas could not ensure the distance education process at all (9.5% for urban area and 4.8% for rural). Also, more women (51.7% versus 42.5 % men) faced difficulties in organizing distance learning. On the Left bank, for 59.2% of parents it, was “easy” and “very easy” to organise the process.

Parents needed support to organize the distance education process.

Out of the total 19.5% respondents who requested support, only 46.1% of respondents received it, while 14.3% of them benefited from partial support and 36.2% did not receive support at all. A higher percentage of respondents of the age group 60+ did not receive support (49.9%).

d. Adaptability of education during the Covid-19 pandemic period


In order to address the challenges related to the need for organizing the education process remotely, besides development of regulations and methodologies, MoECR, in partnership with development partners and CSOs also launched and conducted teachers’ training on remote education, as well as video classes and TV tutorials in preparation for the national examinations.

As a response to the need for adapting to the remote mode of organizing the education process, several initiatives were put in place regarding the digitalization of education by the public 54 and private55 sectors.

In order to build the capacity of teachers for organizing remote education, different programs directed at building the digital skills of teachers were conducted, with more than 20,045 teachers trained within

51 “Parents’ Handbook: What Can You Do to Support Your Child Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic? https://www.unicef.org/moldova/media/4156/file/ghid_pentru_parinti.pdf 52 Instruction available at: https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/instructiune_asistenta_psihologica.pdf 53 Example: Program “I choose to feel good!” – program for psychological assistance of students in the context of Covid-19 pandemic, see: https://mecc.gov.md/ro/content/aleg-sa-ma-simt-bine-un-nou-program-de-asis tenta-ps ihologica-pentru-e levi-contextul-covid-19 54 www.educatieonline.md (Mayoralty of Chisinau), https://invat.online.md (Association of ICT Companies), www.studii.md (created in 2019 with the UN support and by March 2021, 122 schools connected) are examples of education content digitization to facilitate the distance teaching process. 55 MoECR in partnership with Orange Moldova launched the Campaign Connecting People. Moldcell and Moldtelectom provided internet to teachers for two months.

https://www.unicef.org/moldova/media/4156/file/ghid_pentru_parinti.pdf


https://mecc.gov.md/ro/content/aleg-sa-ma-simt-bine-un-nou-program-de-asistenta-psihologica-pentru-elevi-contextul-covid-19

http://www.educatieonline.md/

https://invat.online.md/

http://www.studii.md/

9

the National Program of Digital Literacy of Teachers56, and the organization of the National Conference “On-line education”57, which included 55 thematic webinars and was attended by 8650 teachers58.

Also, MoECR adopted an instruction on the organization of psychological assistance for children/pupils, parents and teachers during the suspension of the educational process59, and subsequently launched educational programmes for psychological assistance for young people, parents, teachers, psychologists and psycho-pedagogues in cooperation with the Republican Center for psycho-pedagogical assistance and development partners60.

On the Left bank, a unified educational internet moodle-platfrom “Transnistria electronic school” was

established with the support of local internet providers, where 10,000 lessons, and 400 tutorials for

pupils from 1 to 11 classes were uploaded.


Access to information related to the conduct of distance education process was not sufficient. 11.3% (10.2% on the Left bank) of respondents mentioned that they had not received information and for 17.1% (18.4% on the Left bank) the information provided was insufficient. The higher the age of the respondent/parent/caretaker, the higher was the share of respondents who declared that the provided information was not sufficient: 42.9% for age group 60+, while for the age group 30 – 44 12.9% declared that the information was not sufficient.

The higher the education level of the respondents, the higher were the expectations for more

information related to the distance education process: 25.1% of respondents with higher education

mentioned that the information provided was not sufficient. Respondents with VET training to a

higher rate reported not having received information related to the conduct of the distance education

process. Also, a higher share of respondents from rural area mentioned that they did not have access

to information related to distance education (12.5% from rural areas and 9.9% from urban areas).

The distance education did not fully meet the needs of children.

53.5% (57.2% on the Left bank) of respondents mentioned that distance learning did not fully meet the needs, while 23.8% (34.7% on the Left bank) mentioned that it did not meet the needs at all of their children. Thus, a total of 77.3% (77.6% in the Transnistria region) of the respondents consider that the education during the pandemic did not correspond at all or sufficiently with the education needs of their children.

e. Quality of the education during the Covid-19 pandemic period


During the lockdown period, the data shows, that the quality of pre-school education was particularly affected, with education being a challenge or even impossible for younger aged children. The parents were responsible to facilitate the education process of their children, based on the tasks provided by the educators61.

56 Clasa Viitorului https://www.clasaviitorului.md/scopul-acestuia-este-sa-asigure-dezvoltarea-competentelor-digitale-a-cadrelor-

didactice-din-invatamantul-general-pentru-a-le-oferi-acestora-noi-oportunitati-de-dezvoltare-profes ionala-precum-s i-a-asig/ 57 General Department on Education, Youth and Sport of Chisinau municipality, press release on the Conference available at: https://chisinauedu.md/conferinta-nationala-educatie-online-se-desfasoara-in-perioada-6-11-iulie-2020/ 58 Informative note from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Research used during the End-of-Year Human Rights Talk: “Moldova and Covid-19 – Ensuring a Human Rights Based Approach to response and recovery measures”, organized by OHCHR on 15.12.20220 59 Instruction available at: https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/instructiune_asistenta_psihologica.pdf 60 Example: Program “I choose to feel good!” – program for psychological assistance of students in the context of Covid-19 pandemic: https://mecc.gov.md/ro/content/aleg-sa-ma-simt-bine-un-nou-program-de-asis tenta-ps ihologica-pentru-e levi-contextul-covid-19 61 Pavel Cerbusca, p. 11

https://www.clasaviitorului.md/scopul-acestuia-este-sa-asigure-dezvoltarea-competentelor-digitale-a-cadrelor-didactice-din-invatamantul-general-pentru-a-le-oferi-acestora-noi-oportunitati-de-dezvoltare-profesionala-precum-si-a-asig/

https://www.clasaviitorului.md/scopul-acestuia-este-sa-asigure-dezvoltarea-competentelor-digitale-a-cadrelor-didactice-din-invatamantul-general-pentru-a-le-oferi-acestora-noi-oportunitati-de-dezvoltare-profesionala-precum-si-a-asig/

https://chisinauedu.md/conferinta-nationala-educatie-online-se-desfasoara-in-perioada-6-11-iulie-2020/


https://mecc.gov.md/ro/content/aleg-sa-ma-simt-bine-un-nou-program-de-asistenta-psihologica-pentru-elevi-contextul-covid-19

10


On-line education affected the quality of the education process. Right holders highlight concerns regarding the low quality of the education process: Despite the fact that more than 50% of the respondents appreciated that the quality of education as very good (5%) or good (47%), 28.6% (36.7 % on the Left bank) of respondents reported it was of poor quality and 14.4 % (28.6 % on the Left bank) assessed it to have been of very poor quality.

People from urban areas and of older age had higher expectations from the educational process. A

higher share of respondents from urban area believed the quality of education was bad (30.4% urban

vs 27.0% rural) or very bad (16.3% vs 12.7% rural). In addition, the higher the age of the respondent

was, the higher was the share of respondents who felt that the quality of the education process was

bad: 12.6% in case of age group 18 – 29 years, with an increase for the age group 45 – 59 (40.4%) and

60+ years (46.6%).

f. Participation in the decision making process


Before the beginning of the new school year 2020/2021, with the decision62 to re-open educational institutions63 as of 1st September 2020, the MoECR developed and proposed seven models for the organization of the education process. Each of the educational institutions had to select one model in consultation with the Local Education Authorities and the school community, including parents, teachers and students, depending on the epidemiological situation of the community64. The final decision was to be taken by the administrative and teacher’s council of the respective educational institution65.


Rights holders highlighted the lack of a participatory approach in decision -making processes related to education. Despite the provision of the MECR to ensure a participatory approach in identifying the model of school reopening, 52.3% of the respondents mentioned that the representatives of the educational institutions had not consulted them. A higher percentage of respondents with 60+ years (65.6%), men (59% versus 47% women) and people with high socio-economic status (61.0%) responded that they had not been consulted.

3. The Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on groups vulnerable to human rights violations

Roma. The shift to online education had a great impact on socially vulnerable children, who were

generally left out of the education system given poor access to internet and/or ICT devices. In Moldova

Roma are more prone to drop-out of school given household works. The lack of adequate equipment,

like a computer or connection to internet, and high illiteracy among their parents created additional

obstacles to benefiting from distance learning66.

62 ECPH Decision no. 26 from 21.08.2020, 63 Ibid, annex of the ECPH Decision no 26 from 21.08.2020 64 MoECR, Press briefing, see: https://mecc.gov.md/ro/content/ministrul-igor-sarov-scoala-din-septembrie-va-fi-responsabila-flexibila-deschisa-reinnoita 65 MoECR, Press briefing: https://mecc.gov.md/ro/content/ministrul-igor-sarov-scoala-din-septembrie-va-fi-responsabila-f lexibila-deschisa-reinnoita 66 UN Coordinated Education Task Force for COVID-19 in Moldova, Thematic paper, p. 5

https://mecc.gov.md/ro/content/ministrul-igor-sarov-scoala-din-septembrie-va-fi-responsabila-flexibila-deschisa-reinnoita




11

Information collected by Roma Voice Platform showed that the COVID-19 pandemic affected

significantly the access to education of Roma children. Data was collected June to July 2020, from

50 families residing compactly in five localities. 10 Roma families were interviewed in each locality

based on a random sample.67 Most Roma children did not have access to education during the

pandemic: the share of school age Roma children enrolled during the lock-down period varied from

0% in case of Schinoasa and Ursari communities; 4.6% in case of Edinet to maximum 60% in case of

Parcani community. Specific barriers faced by the Roma community included: lack of equipment, lack

of skills to use the equipment, lack of resources to pay for the internet connection, and lack of internet

coverage. According to the data, none of the communities received support from duty bearers.

According to the OHCHR survey 76.4% of Roma respondents informed that prior to the pandemic all

of the children in the family attended school, while 18.1% responded that none of the children were

enrolled in education institutions. During the pandemic, however, in December 2020, 40.7% of

respondents with children of school age indicated that none of their children were attending school

at that point.

The situation had considerably worsened in rural areas, where the number of children attending

school decreased by 35%, including 30% more families where none of the children had attended since

the pandemic had begun. In urban areas, the number of dropout had also risen by 20%, leading to

46.2% of families, where none of their children attended the school68.

The data shows that in general the number of Roma families, where some of the children attended

the school, did not raise considerably during the pandemic, increasing from 5.6% to 6.8%. The

exception to this situation being families in rural area where the rate of only some of household’s

children going to school rose by 5%. Thus, the results of the survey suggest that the pandemic

significantly limited access to education of at least one-fourth of Roma families, whose children in the

overwhelming majority of cases could not continue their studies, especially in rural area. Additionally,

Roma were about 25% more concerned about insufficient information regarding the distance–

learning process than non-Roma.

During the pandemic, the most vulnerable group among Roma in terms of access to quality education

were families with low income, mainly Roma from rural areas. The survey indicated that 30% of the

families could not arrange distance-learning education for their children (10.1% among non-Roma

families). The vast majority of Roma with low income faced a lack of ICT devices, which is about 40%

higher than among non-Roma (60% vs 21.3% respectively). This directly conditioned the impossibility

of 50% of their children attending online classes, and 30% could only partially continue education.

Only 35.7 % of Roma children in rural areas could fully attend online classes (compared to 69.3% in

non-Roma families). Roma with low income judged the educational process as poor (70%) and very

poor (20%), with Roma in rural areas having a similar perception. However, Roma families addressed

the educational institutions for support in organizing home schooling less than the general population.

67 https://www.academia.edu/43580477/Raport_de_Monitorizare_Plan_Actiuni_Romi_Moldova_I_jum_anul_2020_Educatie; : (i) Hincesti town, (ii) Schinoasa village, Tibirica commune; (iii) Parcani village, Raciula commune; (iv) Ursari village, Buda commune; (v) E dinet town 68 Ibid.

https://www.academia.edu/43580477/Raport_de_Monitorizare_Plan_Actiuni_Romi_Moldova_I_jum_anul_2020_Educatie

12

Children without parental care. A major challenge that Moldova faces in this regard relates to the

high number of parents emigrating abroad. According to data collected by IOM, around 41,000

children are left at home without parent, given their work abroad69. In many cases children are left

under that guardianship of their relatives, generally the grandparents. Relatives, however, may have

either limited capacity or fewer incentives to ensure that children attend school and are supported

at home to perform well in school.

Children in rural areas. In rural areas, where reported internet access and specifically access to

broadband is more limited than in urban areas, are another vulnerable group. Rural households with

more than one child, and especially those with several children enrolled in school are also potentially

more affected than their urban counterparts, as these households already spend less on

communication (telephone and internet), have less disposable income, and are unlikely to have access

to multiple IT devices70. The data of the OHCHR survey showed discrepancies in availability of IT

devices and difficulties in accessing remote education in rural areas compared with urban areas, thus

the share of children from rural areas who were unable to follow classes simultaneously, do homework

or regularly interact with their teachers was higher.

Children with disabilities. Children with disabilities were particularly affected by the COVID-19

pandemic in their access to education. Despite the existence of the instruction for organizing the

distance education process of children with disabilities71 and development of the methodological

guidance on individualization of the educational process in the school year 2020 - 202172, children

with disabilities, especially children with severe and sensory disabilities, faced difficulties in accessing

on-line education processes.

Lack of support, access to the internet, accessible software and learning materials deepened the

gap for students with disabilities. According to a survey conducted by the Alliance of Organizations

of Persons with Disabilities in the period June to August 202073, a great share of families with children

with disabilities had limited access to equipment: 41% of the respondents used only one equipment

for all children who were part of the family, while 13% did not have access to any technical equipment

to attend the online courses. At the same time, despite the fact that 49% of respondents declared that

their children had access to online courses, 29% mentioned that their children had partial access to

education and 20% of children did not have access. The reason may have been the lack of or

insufficient ICT tools in the family. Another concern is related to the type of equipment available: 63%

of the respondents used the mobile phone; 11% used the computer or tablet and 26% used the land

line (communicated with the teacher by phone). Thus, the vast majority of respondents accessed the

remote learning platform through mobile phones. This arrangement did not ensure full and quality

access to education. At the same time, a great share of families of children with disabilities did not

have sufficient financial resources to ensure the remote learning of their children (76%).

69 See: https://moldova.iom.int/migration-profile-republic-moldova 70 UN Education Task Force for Covid-19 Thematic series, page 6 71 Ministry of Education, Culture and Research, Instruction on organizing the distance education process of children with disabilities, available at: h ttps://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/anexa_la_ordinul_nr._1934_din_28.12.2018.pdf 72 MoECR guidance on individualization of the education process in the school year 2020 – 2021, available at: https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/_26_repere_metod_sap_2020-2021_final.pdf 73 The information was collected from 42 families of children with disabilities living in Edineț and Anenii Noi rayons and Cahul municipality. Out of the total number of respondents, 60% were from rural areas. Out of the total number of respondents, 44% are families with only one child of school age, 44% - families with more than one child of school age; 5% - families with three or four children of school age.

https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/anexa_la_ordinul_nr._1934_din_28.12.2018.pdf

13

Also, the remote learning platforms were not accessible for children with intellectual and sensory

disabilities and did not facilitate the design and implementation of individualised learning plans74.

On the Left bank only a few provisions in de facto regulatory acts could be found related to adapting the distance educational process to the needs of children with disabilities, especially children with intellectual and sensory disabilities. Parents of children with disabilities in the OHCHR survey mentioned that they needed to spend a significant amount of time to assist and supervise the educational process for their children with disabilities.

4. Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic deepened existing inequalities in the education sector of the Republic of Moldova, including on the Left bank. Limited access to education was mainly caused by the lack or limited availability of ICT devices, especially in case of Roma, children living in poverty and families with many children. From the perspective of rights holders, the quality of education was also affected and remote education did not fully respond to the needs of students, especially students with disabilities. The parents faced difficulties in supporting the education process of their children and would have needed more information about the remote education process. Rights holders highlighted the lack of a participatory approach in decision-making processes related to the education process during the pandemic.

74 OHCHR internal document, Ensuring human rights in the Republic of Moldova in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Report on the analysis of the questionnaires of civil society organizations, members of the Working Group on COVID-19 and Human Rights, created at the initiative of the UN Human Rights Office in Moldova

14

Table 1. Do school-age children (who are in grades 1-12) live with you in the household? (The Right bank)

Yes No

Total 28.8% 71.2%

Respondent's gender: Male 28.9% 71.1%

Female 28.7% 71.3%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 19.5% 80.5%

30-44 years old 59.8% 40.2%

45-59 years old 22.4% 77.6%

60+ years old 5.6% 94.4%

Respondent's education:

Post-primary 35.6% 64.4%

General secondary 28.9% 71.1%

Vocational 28.1% 71.9%

Higher 27.3% 72.7%

Reduced working capacity: Yes 21.7% 78.3%

No 31.5% 68.5%

Language of communication: Moldavian/Romanian 29.5% 70.5%

Russian or other 27.2% 72.8%

Occupational status: Economically active 32.1% 67.9%

Economically inactive 26.6% 73.4%

Socioeconomic status:

Low level 23.5% 76.5%

Average level 29.0% 71.0%

High level 32.8% 67.2%

Locality: City 28.1% 71.9%

Village 29.5% 70.5%

15

Table 2. Do school-age children (who are in grades 1-11) live with you in the household? (The Left bank)

Yes No

Total 16.1% 83.9%


Female 17.4% 82.6%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 13.8% 86.2%

30-44 years old 32.6% 67.4%

45-59 years old 15.4% 84.6%

60+ years old 1.3% 98.7%

Educational level:

Post-primary / Secondary 18.2% 81.8%

Vocational 12.8% 87.2%

Higher 18.9% 81.1%


No 16.6% 83.4%

Occupational status: Economically active 21.5% 78.5%

Economically inactive 13.7% 86.3%


Low level 10.9% 89.1%




Village 12.8% 87.2%

16

Table 3. Do school-age children (who are in grades 1-12) live with you in the household? (Roma)

Yes No

Total 32.9% 67.1%


Female 35.0% 65.0%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 36.6% 63.4%

30-44 years old 56.5% 43.5%

45-59 years old 23.6% 76.4%

60+ years old 14.8% 85.2%

Respondent's education: Primary education or without 25.6% 74.4%

Secondary or incomplete education 41.2% 58.8%


No 37.9% 62.1%


Low level 23.3% 76.7%




Village 35.7% 64.3%

17

Table 4. Before the pandemic ....? (Roma)

Did all school-age children go to school?

Of the children who attended school before

March 2020, are they currently attending

school?

Qty Everyone

Some of

them

No one Qty Everyone Some of

them

No one

Total 72 76.4% 5.6% 18.1% 59 52.5% 6.8% 40.7%

Respondent's gender: Male 22 77.3% 9.1% 13.6% 19 63.2% 5.3% 31.6%

Female 50 76.0% 4.0% 20.0% 40 47.5% 7.5% 45.0%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 15 53.3% 6.7% 40.0% 9 55.6% 11.1% 33.3%

30-44 years old 35 82.9% 5.7% 11.4% 31 45.2% 6.5% 48.4%

45-59 years old 13 76.9% 7.7% 15.4% 11 63.6% 0.0% 36.4%

60+ years old 9 88.9% 0.0% 11.1% 8 62.5% 12.5% 25.0%


Primary education or without 30 73.3% 6.7% 20.0% 24 54.2% 0.0% 45.8%

Secondary or incomplete education 42 78.6% 4.8% 16.7% 35 51.4% 11.4% 37.1%

Reduced working capacity: Yes 14 78.6% 7.1% 14.3% 12 33.3% 0.0% 66.7%

No 58 75.9% 5.2% 19.0% 47 57.4% 8.5% 34.0%


Low level 17 70.6% 11.8% 17.6% 14 57.1% 14.3% 28.6%

Average level 25 68.0% 8.0% 24.0% 19 57.9% 5.3% 36.8%

High level 30 86.7% 0.0% 13.3% 26 46.2% 3.8% 50.0%

Locality: City 52 71.2% 3.8% 25.0% 39 51.3% 2.6% 46.2%

Village 20 90.0% 10.0% 0.0% 20 55.0% 15.0% 30.0%

18

Table 5. How easy was it for you to organize distance learning for a pupil? (The Right bank)

Qty Very easy Easily Difficult I couldn't organize DK/NA

Total 255 10.3% 30.3% 47.7% 7.1% 4.7%

Respondent's gender: Male 98 14.5% 30.9% 42.5% 6.3% 5.9%

Female 157 7.1% 29.8% 51.7% 7.7% 3.7%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 32 15.6% 34.8% 37.0% 12.6%

30-44 years old 151 10.4% 26.1% 49.1% 8.3% 6.1%

45-59 years old 51 9.2% 40.4% 49.3% 1.1%

60+ years old 21 36.0% 49.4% 3.9% 10.7%


Post-primary 40 8.2% 36.0% 43.7% 6.4% 5.7%

General secondary 50 12.4% 23.2% 49.6% 7.5% 7.3%

Vocational 89 9.6% 30.8% 44.6% 10.5% 4.6%

Higher 73 11.1% 32.9% 51.2% 3.5% 1.2%

Reduced working capacity: Yes 57 11.1% 33.6% 40.8% 2.6% 11.8%

No 198 10.1% 29.4% 49.4% 8.2% 2.8%

Language of communication: Moldavian/Romanian 210 10.6% 29.1% 49.1% 6.2% 4.9%

Russian or other 45 9.4% 33.3% 44.0% 9.2% 4.1%

Occupational status: Economically active 112 11.6% 30.9% 44.2% 10.3% 3.1%

Economically inactive 143 9.3% 29.8% 50.5% 4.4% 6.0%


Low level 69 5.7% 31.5% 47.4% 10.1% 5.3%

Average level 83 14.0% 26.8% 50.4% 1.7% 7.0%

High level 103 9.9% 32.4% 45.5% 9.6% 2.5%

Locality: City 113 10.3% 41.7% 36.7% 9.5% 1.8%

Village 142 10.3% 20.0% 57.6% 4.8% 7.3%

19

Table 6. How easy was it for you to organize distance learning for a pupil? (The Left bank)

Number Very easy Easily Difficult

I couldn't

organize DK/NA

Total 49 16.3% 42.9% 30.6% 4.1% 6.1%


Female 30 13.3% 36.7% 40.0% 6.7% 3.3%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 12 25.0% 33.3% 25.0% 8.3% 8.3%

30-44 years old 28 17.9% 42.9% 28.6% 3.6% 7.1%

45-59 years old 8 0.0% 50.0% 50.0% 0.0% 0.0%

60+ years old 1 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Educational level:

Post-primary / Secondary 12 8.3% 58.3% 25.0% 0.0% 8.3%

Vocational 16 25.0% 31.3% 31.3% 6.3% 6.3%

Higher 21 14.3% 42.9% 33.3% 4.8% 4.8%

Reduced working capacity:

Yes 6 0.0% 50.0% 33.3% 16.7% 0.0%

No 43 18.6% 41.9% 30.2% 2.3% 7.0%




Low level 11 0.0% 27.3% 54.5% 18.2% 0.0%

Average level 9 11.1% 44.4% 44.4% 0.0% 0.0%

High level 29 24.1% 48.3% 17.2% 0.0% 10.3%

Locality: City 37 16.2% 37.8% 35.1% 5.4% 5.4%

Village 12 16.7% 58.3% 16.7% 0.0% 8.3%

20

Table 7. How easy was it for you to organize distance learning for a pupil? (Roma)

Qty Very easy Easily Difficult I couldn't organize

Total 35 5.7% 31.4% 51.4% 11.4%

Respondent's gender: Male 13 7.7% 23.1% 53.8% 15.4%

Female 22 4.5% 36.4% 50.0% 9.1%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 6 16.7% 33.3% 33.3% 16.7%

30-44 years old 16 0.0% 25.0% 56.3% 18.8%

45-59 years old 7 14.3% 28.6% 57.1% 0.0%

60+ years old 6 0.0% 50.0% 50.0% 0.0%

Respondent's education: Primary education or without 13 7.7% 38.5% 46.2% 7.7%

Secondary or incomplete education 22 4.5% 27.3% 54.5% 13.6%

Reduced working capacity: Yes 4 0.0% 25.0% 75.0% 0.0%

No 31 6.5% 32.3% 48.4% 12.9%


Low level 10 0.0% 20.0% 50.0% 30.0%

Average level 12 8.3% 33.3% 58.3% 0.0%

High level 13 7.7% 38.5% 46.2% 7.7%

Locality: City 21 4.8% 38.1% 47.6% 9.5%

Village 14 7.1% 21.4% 57.1% 14.3%

21

Table 8. During studies terminated due to the pandemic, did you have devices in your household from which children could do their homework remotely? (The Right bank)

Qty Yes, enough

Yes, but not enough

No DK/NA

Total 255 61.5% 24.4% 10.3% 3.8%


Female 157 58.0% 29.6% 10.3% 2.2%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 32 73.3% 16.2% 10.5%

30-44 years old 151 59.4% 25.5% 10.0% 5.0%

45-59 years old 51 58.5% 26.5% 13.9% 1.1%

60+ years old 21 69.2% 23.9% 6.9%


Post-primary 40 62.0% 20.5% 14.2% 3.3%

General secondary 50 45.1% 39.3% 7.2% 8.3%

Vocational 89 65.2% 19.0% 13.4% 2.4%

Higher 73 69.2% 22.4% 7.3% 1.2%


No 198 62.7% 24.9% 9.5% 2.8%

Language of communication: Moldavian/Romanian 210 61.1% 23.4% 11.8% 3.7%

Russian or other 45 62.4% 27.1% 6.4% 4.1%

Occupational status: Economically active 112 62.2% 25.9% 10.0% 1.9%

Economically inactive 143 60.9% 23.3% 10.4% 5.4%


Low level 69 48.2% 27.1% 21.3% 3.3%

Average level 83 57.2% 32.7% 3.3% 6.8%

High level 103 72.6% 16.2% 9.6% 1.7%

Locality: City 113 67.0% 22.7% 8.5% 1.8%

Village 142 56.5% 26.0% 11.9% 5.6%

22

Table 9. During studies transferred online due to the pandemic, did you have devices in your household from which children could do their homework remotely? (The Left bank)

Number Yes, enough

Yes, but not

enough No DK/NA

Total 49 77.6% 14.3% 6.1% 2.0%


Female 30 73.3% 20.0% 3.3% 3.3%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 12 75.0% 16.7% 8.3% 0.0%

30-44 years old 28 71.4% 17.9% 7.1% 3.6%

45-59 years old 8 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

60+ years old 1 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Educational level:

Post-primary / Secondary 12 66.7% 16.7% 16.7% 0.0%

Vocational 16 81.3% 12.5% 0.0% 6.3%

Higher 21 81.0% 14.3% 4.8% 0.0%


No 43 74.4% 16.3% 7.0% 2.3%




Low level 11 63.6% 18.2% 18.2% 0.0%

Average level 9 88.9% 11.1% 0.0% 0.0%

High level 29 79.3% 13.8% 3.4% 3.4%

Locality: City 37 81.1% 16.2% 2.7% 0.0%

Village 12 66.7% 8.3% 16.7% 8.3%

23

Table 10. During studies terminated due to the pandemic ... (Roma)

did you have devices in your household (computer,

laptop or tablet) from which children could do their

homework remotely?

at the institution where your child is studying, did he/she attend lessons online, via the Internet?

Qty Yes, enough

Yes, but not

enough No

Yes, in all

subjects

Yes, in some

subjects No

Total 35 45.7% 31.4% 22.9% 45.7% 37.1% 17.1%

Respondent's gender: Male 13 53.8% 23.1% 23.1% 53.8% 23.1% 23.1%

Female 22 40.9% 36.4% 22.7% 40.9% 45.5% 13.6%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 6 50.0% 33.3% 16.7% 50.0% 0.0% 50.0%

30-44 years old 16 25.0% 43.8% 31.3% 31.3% 50.0% 18.8%

45-59 years old 7 57.1% 14.3% 28.6% 57.1% 42.9% 0.0%

60+ years old 6 83.3% 16.7% 0.0% 66.7% 33.3% 0.0%


Primary education or without 13 38.5% 30.8% 30.8% 38.5% 30.8% 30.8%

Secondary or incomplete education 22 50.0% 31.8% 18.2% 50.0% 40.9% 9.1%


Yes 4 25.0% 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% 75.0% 0.0%

No 31 48.4% 29.0% 22.6% 48.4% 32.3% 19.4%


Low level 10 10.0% 30.0% 60.0% 20.0% 30.0% 50.0%

Average level 12 50.0% 41.7% 8.3% 41.7% 58.3% 0.0%

High level 13 69.2% 23.1% 7.7% 69.2% 23.1% 7.7%

Locality: City 21 47.6% 33.3% 19.0% 52.4% 33.3% 14.3%

Village 14 42.9% 28.6% 28.6% 35.7% 42.9% 21.4%

24

Table 11. During studies terminated due to the pandemic, at the institution where your child is studying, did he/she attend lessons online, via the Internet? (The Right bank)

Qty Yes, in all subjects

Yes, in some subjects

No DK/NA

Total 255 71.1% 17.1% 8.3% 3.4%


Female 157 72.1% 19.2% 6.0% 2.8%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 32 89.1% 5.7% 2.6% 2.6%

30-44 years old 151 70.1% 16.5% 9.8% 3.6%

45-59 years old 51 63.8% 26.9% 8.2% 1.1%

60+ years old 21 66.8% 17.7% 3.9% 11.6%


Post-primary 40 63.4% 21.3% 15.3%


Vocational 89 81.7% 8.6% 7.9% 1.7%

Higher 73 70.6% 21.4% 6.8% 1.2%


No 198 74.6% 16.2% 7.1% 2.1%


Russian or other 45 78.6% 9.8% 7.4% 4.1%




Low level 69 62.2% 18.7% 13.4% 5.7%

Average level 83 71.5% 18.2% 6.4% 4.0%

High level 103 76.0% 15.3% 7.0% 1.7%

Locality: City 113 73.1% 17.8% 8.3% 0.8%

Village 142 69.3% 16.5% 8.4% 5.8%

25

Table 12. During online learning, at the institution where your child is studying, did he/she attend lessons online? (The Left bank)

Number

Yes, in all

subjects

Yes, but not in all

subjects No DK/NA

Total 49 71.4% 18.4% 8.2% 2.0%


Female 30 70.0% 16.7% 10.0% 3.3%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 12 66.7% 16.7% 16.7% 0.0%

30-44 years old 28 71.4% 17.9% 7.1% 3.6%

45-59 years old 8 75.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0%

60+ years old 1 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Educational level:


Vocational 16 87.5% 6.3% 0.0% 6.3%

Higher 21 66.7% 28.6% 4.8% 0.0%


No 43 69.8% 18.6% 9.3% 2.3%




Low level 11 72.7% 9.1% 18.2% 0.0%

Average level 9 55.6% 33.3% 11.1% 0.0%

High level 29 75.9% 17.2% 3.4% 3.4%

Locality: City 37 70.3% 21.6% 8.1% 0.0%

Village 12 75.0% 8.3% 8.3% 8.3%

26

Table 13. During studies terminated due to the pandemic, were you provided with information about the organization of distance learning ? (The Right bank)

Qty Yes, enough

Yes, but not enough

No DK/NA

Total 255 67.6% 17.1% 11.3% 4.1%


Female 157 70.3% 21.1% 6.1% 2.6%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 32 86.4% 13.6%

30-44 years old 151 71.1% 12.9% 12.4% 3.6%

45-59 years old 51 51.7% 26.5% 15.8% 6.0%

60+ years old 21 35.5% 42.9% 8.5% 13.1%


Post-primary 40 71.4% 15.7% 13.0%


Vocational 89 70.3% 12.1% 13.9% 3.6%

Higher 73 64.3% 25.1% 8.3% 2.3%


No 198 70.5% 16.9% 9.6% 3.0%


Russian or other 45 68.5% 22.2% 5.2% 4.1%




Low level 69 65.9% 20.3% 10.5% 3.3%

Average level 83 61.3% 19.6% 11.5% 7.6%

High level 103 73.7% 13.2% 11.5% 1.7%

Locality: City 113 71.1% 17.5% 9.9% 1.5%

Village 142 64.3% 16.7% 12.5% 6.5%

27

Table 14. During online learning, were you provided with information about the organization of distance learning? (The Left bank)

Number Yes, enough

Yes, but not

complete No DK/NA

Total 49 67.3% 18.4% 10.2% 4.1%


Female 30 66.7% 20.0% 6.7% 6.7%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 12 66.7% 16.7% 16.7% 0.0%

30-44 years old 28 71.4% 17.9% 7.1% 3.6%

45-59 years old 8 62.5% 25.0% 12.5% 0.0%

60+ years old 1 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

Educational level:


Vocational 16 81.3% 0.0% 12.5% 6.3%

Higher 21 61.9% 23.8% 9.5% 4.8%


No 43 65.1% 20.9% 9.3% 4.7%




Low level 11 81.8% 9.1% 9.1% 0.0%

Average level 9 55.6% 22.2% 11.1% 11.1%

High level 29 65.5% 20.7% 10.3% 3.4%

Locality: City 37 67.6% 21.6% 10.8% 0.0%

Village 12 66.7% 8.3% 8.3% 16.7%

28

Table 15. During studies terminated due to the pandemic ... (Roma)

Have you been provided with information about the organization of distance

learning?

Qty Yes, enough Yes, but not enough No

Total 35 42.9% 37.1% 20.0%

Respondent's gender: Male 13 46.2% 30.8% 23.1%

Female 22 40.9% 40.9% 18.2%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 6 50.0% 16.7% 33.3%

30-44 years old 16 43.8% 37.5% 18.8%

45-59 years old 7 28.6% 42.9% 28.6%

60+ years old 6 50.0% 50.0% 0.0%

Respondent's education: Primary education or without 13 38.5% 23.1% 38.5%

Secondary or incomplete education 22 45.5% 45.5% 9.1%

Reduced working capacity: Yes 4 25.0% 75.0% 0.0%

No 31 45.2% 32.3% 22.6%


Low level 10 0.0% 50.0% 50.0%

Average level 12 50.0% 41.7% 8.3%

High level 13 69.2% 23.1% 7.7%

Locality: City 21 47.6% 38.1% 14.3%

Village 14 35.7% 35.7% 28.6%

29

Table 16. During studies terminated due to the pandemic, did you seek support for organizing distance learning? (The Right bank)

Qty Yes No

Total 255 19.5% 80.5%

Respondent's gender: Male 98 17.6% 82.4%

Female 157 21.0% 79.0%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 32 16.6% 83.4%

30-44 years old 151 16.9% 83.1%

45-59 years old 51 28.9% 71.1%

60+ years old 21 24.8% 75.2%


Post-primary 40 20.0% 80.0%

General secondary 50 16.5% 83.5%

Vocational 89 17.6% 82.4%

Higher 73 21.9% 78.1%

Reduced working capacity: Yes 57 17.1% 82.9%

No 198 20.1% 79.9%

Language of communication: Moldavian/Romanian 210 22.2% 77.8%

Russian or other 45 12.7% 87.3%

Occupational status: Economically active 112 23.6% 76.4%

Economically inactive 143 16.1% 83.9%


Low level 69 18.8% 81.2%

Average level 83 18.1% 81.9%

High level 103 21.1% 78.9%

Locality: City 113 21.9% 78.1%

Village 142 17.4% 82.6%

30

Table 17. Have you received such support? (The Right bank)

Qty Yes, in full Yes, partially No DK/NA

Total 54 46.1% 14.3% 36.2% 3.4%

Respondent's gender: Male 19 52.9% 18.3% 28.8%

Female 35 41.6% 11.7% 41.1% 5.6%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 6 49.9% 34.2% 15.9%

30-44 years old 28 48.3% 16.1% 32.5% 3.0%

45-59 years old 14 39.0% 6.5% 48.3% 6.2%

60+ years old 6 50.1% 49.9%


Post-primary 9 81.4% 11.4% 7.2%


Vocational 16 37.2% 5.4% 57.3%

Higher 18 44.0% 21.4% 29.6% 4.9%

Reduced working capacity: Yes 10 52.4% 19.2% 28.4%

No 44 44.7% 13.3% 37.9% 4.1%






Low level 13 51.5% 14.7% 26.6% 7.2%

Average level 15 38.2% 5.3% 56.5%

High level 26 48.8% 20.5% 27.0% 3.7%

Locality: City 27 46.7% 10.1% 40.1% 3.2%

Village 27 45.4% 19.2% 31.8% 3.6%

31

Table 18. During online learning, did you apply for support for…? (The Left bank)

organization of distance learning If YES: Have you received such support?

Number Yes No Number Yes, in full Yes, partially No

Total 49 20.4% 79.6% 10 70.0% 20.0% 10.0%

Respondent's gender: Male 19 15.8% 84.2% 3 33.3% 33.3% 33.3%

Female 30 23.3% 76.7% 7 85.7% 14.3% 0.0%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 12 16.7% 83.3% 2 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

30-44 years old 28 25.0% 75.0% 7 57.1% 28.6% 14.3%

45-59 years old 8 12.5% 87.5% 1 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

60+ years old 1 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Educational level:

Post-primary / Secondary 12 16.7% 83.3% 2 50.0% 50.0% 0.0%

Vocational 16 18.8% 81.3% 3 66.7% 0.0% 33.3%

Higher 21 23.8% 76.2% 5 80.0% 20.0% 0.0%

Reduced working capacity: Yes 6 33.3% 66.7% 2 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

No 43 18.6% 81.4% 8 62.5% 25.0% 12.5%

Occupational status: Economically active 20 5.0% 95.0% 1 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Economically inactive 29 31.0% 69.0% 9 66.7% 22.2% 11.1%


Low level 11 36.4% 63.6% 4 50.0% 25.0% 25.0%

Average level 9 33.3% 66.7% 3 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

High level 29 10.3% 89.7% 3 66.7% 33.3% 0.0%

Locality: City 37 21.6% 78.4% 8 87.5% 12.5% 0.0%

Village 12 16.7% 83.3% 2 0.0% 50.0% 50.0%

32

Table 19. During studies terminated due to the pandemic ...? (Roma)

Have you applied for support for

organizing distance learning? If YES: Have you received such support?

Qty Yes No Qty Yes, in full Yes, partially No

Total 35 14.3% 85.7% 5 40.0% 40.0% 20.0%

Respondent's gender: Male 13 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Female 22 22.7% 77.3% 5 40.0% 40.0% 20.0%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 6 16.7% 83.3% 1 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

30-44 years old 16 6.3% 93.8% 1 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

45-59 years old 7 28.6% 71.4% 2 50.0% 50.0% 0.0%

60+ years old 6 16.7% 83.3% 1 0.0% 100.0% 0.0%


Primary education or without 13 23.1% 76.9% 3 33.3% 33.3% 33.3%

Secondary or incomplete education 22 9.1% 90.9% 2 50.0% 50.0% 0.0%


Yes 4 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

No 31 16.1% 83.9% 5 40.0% 40.0% 20.0%


Low level 10 0.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Average level 12 16.7% 83.3% 2 50.0% 50.0% 0.0%

High level 13 23.1% 76.9% 3 33.3% 33.3% 33.3%

Locality: City 21 19.0% 81.0% 4 50.0% 25.0% 25.0%

Village 14 7.1% 92.9% 1 0.0% 100.0% 0.0%

33

Table 20. To what extent do you think distance learning during the pandemic met the needs of your children? (The Right bank)

Qty

To a large extent

To a small extent Not at all DK/NA

Total 255 13.0% 53.5% 23.8% 9.7%


Female 157 12.9% 57.6% 21.5% 8.1%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 32 29.1% 41.8% 18.3% 10.8%

30-44 years old 151 10.2% 51.5% 28.3% 10.1%

45-59 years old 51 11.3% 70.3% 9.9% 8.5%

60+ years old 21 15.4% 47.0% 30.6% 6.9%


Post-primary 40 9.7% 52.1% 30.3% 8.0%


Vocational 89 10.8% 53.7% 26.6% 8.9%

Higher 73 15.0% 53.1% 24.0% 7.9%


No 198 15.6% 51.6% 23.9% 8.8%


Russian or other 45 14.8% 41.2% 30.5% 13.5%




Low level 69 13.3% 53.0% 22.8% 10.8%

Average level 83 9.0% 61.1% 20.0% 9.9%

High level 103 16.0% 47.7% 27.4% 9.0%

Locality: City 113 15.8% 47.4% 29.0% 7.8%

Village 142 10.4% 59.0% 19.1% 11.5%

34

Table 21. To what extent do you think distance learning during the pandemic met the needs of your children? (The Left bank)

Number

To a large

extent

To a small

extent Not at all DK/NA

Total 49 14.3% 42.9% 34.7% 8.2%


Female 30 13.3% 40.0% 43.3% 3.3%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 12 8.3% 50.0% 25.0% 16.7%

30-44 years old 28 21.4% 39.3% 35.7% 3.6%

45-59 years old 8 0.0% 50.0% 37.5% 12.5%

60+ years old 1 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0%

Educational level:


Vocational 16 6.3% 56.3% 25.0% 12.5%

Higher 21 14.3% 28.6% 57.1% 0.0%


No 43 16.3% 44.2% 32.6% 7.0%




Low level 11 18.2% 36.4% 45.5% 0.0%

Average level 9 11.1% 66.7% 22.2% 0.0%

High level 29 13.8% 37.9% 34.5% 13.8%

Locality: City 37 10.8% 40.5% 40.5% 8.1%

Village 12 25.0% 50.0% 16.7% 8.3%

35

Table 22. To what extent do you think distance learning during the pandemic met the needs of your children? (Roma)

Qty To a large extent To a small extent Not at all DK/NA

Total 35 8.6% 57.1% 28.6% 5.7%


Female 22 9.1% 50.0% 31.8% 9.1%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 6 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

30-44 years old 16 6.3% 43.8% 43.8% 6.3%

45-59 years old 7 14.3% 42.9% 28.6% 14.3%

60+ years old 6 16.7% 66.7% 16.7% 0.0%

Respondent's education: Primary education or without 13 15.4% 46.2% 38.5% 0.0%

Secondary or incomplete education 22 4.5% 63.6% 22.7% 9.1%


No 31 9.7% 58.1% 29.0% 3.2%


Low level 10 0.0% 40.0% 60.0% 0.0%

Average level 12 16.7% 58.3% 16.7% 8.3%

High level 13 7.7% 69.2% 15.4% 7.7%

Locality: City 21 9.5% 52.4% 28.6% 9.5%

Village 14 7.1% 64.3% 28.6% 0.0%

36

Table 23. How would you appreciate the quality of the educational process during the pandemic? (The Right bank)

Qty Very good Good Bad Very bad DK/NA

Total 255 5.0% 47.0% 28.6% 14.4% 5.0%


Female 157 4.4% 46.6% 33.5% 12.0% 3.5%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 32 7.9% 61.6% 12.6% 17.9%

30-44 years old 151 5.1% 44.8% 26.8% 17.7% 5.6%

45-59 years old 51 3.0% 49.2% 40.4% 1.8% 5.6%

60+ years old 21 4.7% 31.7% 46.6% 10.1% 6.9%


Post-primary 40 8.2% 39.8% 36.1% 13.6% 2.4%

General secondary 50 5.0% 51.1% 24.4% 12.1% 7.3%

Vocational 89 5.7% 44.0% 27.8% 17.6% 4.8%

Higher 73 2.9% 50.6% 29.7% 13.3% 3.4%


No 198 5.6% 48.3% 25.8% 16.0% 4.3%

Language of communication: Moldavian/Romanian 210 5.0% 48.2% 29.1% 14.2% 3.5%

Russian or other 45 5.0% 43.9% 27.4% 15.1% 8.7%




Low level 69 4.6% 52.0% 27.1% 12.9% 3.3%

Average level 83 6.3% 44.4% 32.3% 10.9% 6.2%

High level 103 4.2% 46.3% 26.5% 18.2% 4.9%

Locality: City 113 8.2% 39.5% 30.4% 16.3% 5.6%

Village 142 2.1% 53.8% 27.0% 12.7% 4.4%

37

Table 24. How would you appreciate the quality of the educational process during the pandemic? (The Left bank)

Number Very good Good Bad Very bad DK/NA

Total 49 4.1% 28.6% 36.7% 28.6% 2.0%


Female 30 0.0% 26.7% 36.7% 33.3% 3.3%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 12 0.0% 50.0% 33.3% 16.7% 0.0%

30-44 years old 28 7.1% 28.6% 21.4% 39.3% 3.6%

45-59 years old 8 0.0% 0.0% 87.5% 12.5% 0.0%

60+ years old 1 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Educational level:

Post-primary / Secondary 12 0.0% 41.7% 33.3% 25.0% 0.0%

Vocational 16 0.0% 31.3% 56.3% 6.3% 6.3%

Higher 21 9.5% 19.0% 23.8% 47.6% 0.0%


No 43 4.7% 32.6% 34.9% 25.6% 2.3%




Low level 11 0.0% 27.3% 27.3% 45.5% 0.0%

Average level 9 11.1% 11.1% 55.6% 22.2% 0.0%

High level 29 3.4% 34.5% 34.5% 24.1% 3.4%

Locality: City 37 5.4% 29.7% 37.8% 27.0% 0.0%

Village 12 0.0% 25.0% 33.3% 33.3% 8.3%

38

Table 25. How would you appreciate the quality of the educational process during the pandemic? (Roma)

Qty Very good Good Bad Very bad DK/NA

Total 35 0.0% 25.7% 54.3% 14.3% 5.7%


Female 22 0.0% 27.3% 50.0% 13.6% 9.1%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 6 0.0% 33.3% 66.7% 0.0% 0.0%

30-44 years old 16 0.0% 18.8% 50.0% 18.8% 12.5%

45-59 years old 7 0.0% 42.9% 42.9% 14.3% 0.0%

60+ years old 6 0.0% 16.7% 66.7% 16.7% 0.0%

Respondent's education: Primary education or without 13 0.0% 46.2% 46.2% 0.0% 7.7%

Secondary or incomplete education 22 0.0% 13.6% 59.1% 22.7% 4.5%


No 31 0.0% 29.0% 54.8% 9.7% 6.5%


Low level 10 0.0% 0.0% 70.0% 20.0% 10.0%

Average level 12 0.0% 50.0% 33.3% 16.7% 0.0%

High level 13 0.0% 23.1% 61.5% 7.7% 7.7%

Locality: City 21 0.0% 38.1% 47.6% 4.8% 9.5%

Village 14 0.0% 7.1% 64.3% 28.6% 0.0%

39

Table 26. Have you ever been asked by the representatives of the educational institution in which your child is studying about your opinion on the return to education in the usual school format? (The Right bank)

Qty Yes No

Total 255 47.7% 52.3%


Female 157 53.0% 47.0%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 32 47.8% 52.2%

30-44 years old 151 49.4% 50.6%

45-59 years old 51 45.8% 54.2%

60+ years old 21 34.4% 65.6%


Post-primary 40 48.0% 52.0%

General secondary 50 61.9% 38.1%


Higher 73 42.6% 57.4%


No 198 48.4% 51.6%

Language of communication: Moldavian/Romanian 210 47.1% 52.9%





Low level 69 55.2% 44.8%


High level 103 39.0% 61.0%


Village 142 47.4% 52.6%

40

Table 27. Have you ever been asked by the representatives of the educational institution in which your child is studying about your opinion on the return to education in the usual school format? (The Left bank)

Number Yes No

Total 49 24.5% 75.5%


Female 30 23.3% 76.7%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 12 8.3% 91.7%

30-44 years old 28 39.3% 60.7%

45-59 years old 8 0.0% 100.0%

60+ years old 1 0.0% 100.0%

Educational level:

Post-primary / Secondary 12 8.3% 91.7%


Higher 21 33.3% 66.7%


No 43 25.6% 74.4%




Low level 11 45.5% 54.5%


High level 29 20.7% 79.3%


Village 12 33.3% 66.7%

41

Table 28. Have you ever been asked by the representatives of the educational institution in which your child is studying about your o pinion on the return to education in the usual school format? (Roma)

Qty Yes No

Total 35 34.3% 65.7%


Female 22 36.4% 63.6%

Respondent's age:

18-29 years old 6 16.7% 83.3%

30-44 years old 16 37.5% 62.5%

45-59 years old 7 42.9% 57.1%

60+ years old 6 33.3% 66.7%

Respondent's education: Primary education or without 13 30.8% 69.2%

Secondary or incomplete education 22 36.4% 63.6%


No 31 29.0% 71.0%


Low level 10 30.0% 70.0%


High level 13 30.8% 69.2%


Village 14 35.7% 64.3%

annex c. right to education...2.7 (1,500/541) in 2020. there is also an increase in the development...

Documents