School Leaders on Safety and Learning Goals

Last registered on February 03, 2026

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
School Leaders on Safety and Learning Goals
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0017297
Initial registration date
November 21, 2025

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
November 25, 2025, 7:59 AM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
February 03, 2026, 7:17 PM EST

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
UC Merced

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
University of Buffalo

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2025-11-17
End date
2025-12-15
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Across education systems, school leaders play a central role in shaping two of the most fundamental dimensions of student outcomes: learning and safety. Students cannot learn effectively in environments where they feel unsafe, and even the best-managed classrooms will fail to reach their potential if teaching and learning are weak. Effective leadership therefore requires not only improving academic performance but also maintaining a positive, safe school culture. Yet, while both are widely recognized as core to school quality, there is limited evidence on how leaders prioritize and act on these responsibilities in practice.

This study examines how secondary school leaders in Uganda navigate these two domains of leadership—student performance and student safety. On student performance, we explore how leaders engage with data from the Uganda Certificate of Education (UCE) exams—one of the key sources of performance feedback available to schools. We ask three related questions:

(1) How do school leaders prioritize improvement across high- and low-achieving students and different subjects?
(2) How well do school leaders know the skills of their students?
(3) How well do school leaders understand and use performance data when setting strategies for student achievement? Do exam results provide genuinely new or actionable information?

Turning to school safety, we examine how leaders respond to scenarios of teacher and student misconduct—an equally critical but often less visible dimension of school quality. In particular, we investigate whether the gender of the student victim influences leaders’ perceptions of severity and their proposed disciplinary actions.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Pugatch, Todd and Ketki Sheth. 2026. "School Leaders on Safety and Learning Goals." AEA RCT Registry. February 03. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.17297-1.1
Sponsors & Partners

Sponsors

Partner

Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
We study two randomized interventions: 1) sharing student learning data in an aggregated format, and 2) randomizing gender (and severity) on vignette questions around teacher misconduct. We also include a discrete choice experiment in which we randomize four attributes around school performance.
Intervention (Hidden)
Intervention Start Date
2025-11-17
Intervention End Date
2025-12-15

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
For the first randomization on student performance data, our key outcomes are correctly assessing student performance, how school leaders prioritize and identify subjects, and the action plan they would take in response to performance data.

For the second randomization on school-based teacher misconduct, we explore whether school leaders respond more to misconduct based on student gender.

For the discrete choice experiment, we analyze how school leaders value trade-offs between performance improvements at different points in the distribution of exam results.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
This is a survey and lab in the field experiment with school leaders in Uganda, in which we have randomized key elements (described above).
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
randomization done in survey software (surveyCTO)
Randomization Unit
Individuals (i.e., school leaders)
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
Between 200 and 350 school leaders.
Sample size: planned number of observations
Between 200 and 350 school leaders.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Each random assignment has a 50% probability (i.e., 100 to 175 would be randomly assigned to a given treatment).
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Mildmay Uganda Research Ethics Committee
IRB Approval Date
2024-11-14
IRB Approval Number
MUREC-2024-474
Analysis Plan

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials