Smart School Qualification Standards

(SSQS)

2nd Edition, 2009

Contents

Background 1

About MoE’s Role in MSC Malaysia 3

About MSC Malaysia 4

Multimedia Development Corporation Sdn Bhd (MDeC) 6

Smart School Qualification Standards (SSQS) 7

Introduction 7

ICT Benchmarking in Education 8

Strategic Overview of the Smart School Qualification Standards (SSQS) 11

Star Ranking Methodology 14

SSQS Star Ranking 18

SSQS Chart 19
Background

Nothing is more critical to Malaysia’s future than education. The Government is

committed to continue its investment in the future of this nation through education-
related policies that will boost Malaysia’s global competitiveness. A quality education
system will drive innovation, competitiveness and set the stage for Malaysia’s growth
in the global economy.

ICT is intended to form the nucleus that supports the reinvention of the whole nation
towards becoming a knowledge-based economy by 2020. ICT is to be used both as 1
a tool for education and for revolutionising the education system. Skills such as digital
literacy, effective communication, critical thinking and problem solving will empower
Malaysians and compete more effectively in this increasingly technology-based
world.

The Smart School Qualification Standards (SSQS) and its associated Star Ranking,
mark a critical turning point in the evolution of Malaysia’s education system. The
SSQS introduces a two-pronged strategy based on guidance and training and helps
educators in Smart Schools better understand their role and expectations.
 As the use of ICT continues to become more pervasive in schools, the SSQS sets
benchmarks that will measure the successful transformation of the national education
system. By monitoring the quality of the national education system, the Ministry of
Education and Multimedia Development Corporation (MDeC) can focus on raising
the bar on the quality of the education system, with better policy planning and
programme improvements.

2 Educators now have greater access to ICT resources through training workshops,
online value adding applications and on-site guidance. The SSQS provides the
necessary stimulus for change within the education system and ensures a better return
on investment from the deployment of ICT resources in schools throughout
Malaysia.

The SSQS is unique in that is possibly the first set of indicators co-created by the
Ministry of Education and MDeC a government-driven organisation for national roll-
out and development, as opposed to international comparison and benchmarking.

The SSQS will empower educators to inspire a new generation of students that will
be better equipped to fuel the nation’s evolution towards developing a knowledge-
based economy.
About MoE’s Role in MSC Malaysia

The Ministry of Education, Malaysia, is the lead agency of the Smart School Flagship
Application, one of the original seven flagship applications of the MSC Malaysia
launched in 1997.

From 1997 to 2002, the Ministry worked with MDeC, other Government agencies
and the private sector to plan, implement, monitor and evaluate the Smart School 3
Pilot Project.

As the lead agency of a flagship application, the Ministry is a member of the MSC
Malaysia Flagship Coordination Committee and the MSC Malaysia Implementation
Council which oversee the planning and implementation of flagship applications and
other initiatives relating to the MSC Malaysia.

In addition, the Minister of Education attends the MSC Malaysia International Advisory
Panel which meets every two years.

The Ministry is also a member of several committees, which deal with specific matters
relating to the use of ICT.
 About MSC Malaysia

MSC Malaysia, formerly known as the Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) was
conceptualised as an exciting initiative to spur the nation’s entry into the burgeoning
global Information & Communication Technology industry.

4 The MSC Malaysia has since grown into a thriving and dynamic ICT hub, hosting
more than 2192 multinationals, foreign-owned and home-grown companies focused
on multimedia and communications products, solutions, services and research and
development.

With this unique corridor, leading ICT companies from around the world are
motivated and incentivised to locate their industries in the MSC Malaysia and
undertake research, develop new products and technologies and export from this
base. The MSC Malaysia is also an ideal growth environment for Malaysian ICT Small
and Medium Enterprises to transform themselves into world-class companies.
Furthermore, the MSC Malaysia welcomes countries to use its highly advanced
infrastructural facilities as a global test-bed for ICT applications and a hub for their
regional operations in Asia.
Four (4) innovative developmental flagship applications were put in place to accelerate
ICT growth and development in the areas of Telehealth, Smart Card, Electronic
Government and the Smart School flagship which implementation is led by the
Ministry of Education.

To spark progress, MSC Malaysia-status is awarded to both local and foreign

companies that develop or use multimedia technologies to produce or enhance their 5
products and services and for process development. In return, MSC Malaysia-status
companies enjoy a set of incentives and benefits from the Malaysian Government
backed by the ten Bill of Guarantees.

In 2004, the MSC Malaysia National Rollout began, spreading the MSC Malaysia
benefits and value propositions nationwide and reaching out to both industry and
the community-at-large. By the year 2020, the MSC Malaysia Agenda will be
extended to the whole country. It will be a national transformation for Malaysia to
become a Knowledge-based Economy and Society, as envisaged in Vision 2020.
 Multimedia Development Corporation Sdn Bhd (MDeC)
Your gateway to the MSC Malaysia is the Multimedia Development Corporation
(MDeC), a high-powered ‘one-stop agency’, focusing on ensuring the success of the
MSC Malaysia and the companies operating in it.
MDeC has been incorporated under the Companies Act of Malaysia, owned and
funded by the Government. At MDeC, the entrepreneurial efficiency and effectiveness
of a private company are combined with the decision-making and authority of a
6 high-powered government agency.
Its role is to advise the Malaysian Government on legislation and policies, develop
MSC Malaysia-specific practices, and set breakthrough standards for multimedia
operations. It also promotes the MSC Malaysia locally and globally, as well as supports
companies which are located within the MSC Malaysia.
MDeC is dedicated to ensuring the MSC Malaysia is the world’s best environment to
harness the full potential of ICT. MDeC is a champion, facilitator and partner. We
champion the merits of the MSC Malaysia, facilitate the entry of companies and partner
with the Government and the private sector in realising both a vision and an
opportunity.
MDeC ensures that companies interested in entering the MSC Malaysia have what
they need to succeed. MDeC stands ready to work with investors, foreign and local,
big or small, to ensure that the MSC Malaysia fulfils its promises.
Smart School Qualification Standards (SSQS)

INTRODUCTION

Since the Smart School initiative was launched in July 1997 as one of the seven
flagships of the MSC Malaysia, much has been achieved, but one of the most critical
includes the establishment of the ‘88 Smart Schools’ as a consequence of the pilot
project by the Ministry of Education (MoE).

These 88 Smart Schools were initially identified to act as the nucleus for the 7
reference of Smart School concepts, materials, skills, and technologies developed by
the MoE.

However, analysis such as the Impact Study (2005) indicated that the infrastructure
set up by the MoE, including the provision of computers, applications and ICT
Coordinators to the various schools, required enhancement in management and
optimisation of utilisation.

As such in April 2006, the National IT Council chaired by the Prime Minister
endorsed the Minister of Education’s proposal that MDeC create a systematic
transformation of the selected ‘88 Smart Schools’ into model schools. This included
promoting best practices in technology-enabled teaching, learning and school
management.
 MDeC was given the mandate to develop an easy model for replication by the
88 Smart Schools. These 88 Smart Schools will in turn act as role models to showcase
utilisation and maximisation of ICT usage in education through the infrastructure
provided by the MoE. Based on a 2-pronged approach, MDeC together with the
MoE has provided guidance and training on basic management and transformation
principles of positive “Monitoring” and “Value-adding”, to achieve this goal.

In order to encourage active interest and participation of schools, a measured and

graded benchmark of ICT utilisation of the Smart Schools was created. There are
8 several monitoring tools planned but of prime importance is the Smart School
Qualification Standards (SSQS) based on Star Ranking. In addition, training workshops,
online value-adding applications and on-site guidance are being implemented to
reinforce ICT usage in education. In June 2006, the Minister of Education agreed with
MDeC on the establishment of the SSQS based on Star Ranking.

I CT Benchma rkin g in Education

As ICT becomes widespread, schools as well as education system as a whole need to
develop performance indicators to monitor the use and outcomes of the technologies.
These indicators are needed specifically to monitor the types of ICT resources
available, the extent and nature of professional development efforts, and changes in
teaching/learning practices.
The indicators show how ICT should be used not only as a basic operational tool (such
as the number of computers and online connectivity) but also as a communication
tool which promotes the development of:
• creativity
• interactivity
• collaborative learning
• critical thinking
• problem-solving
9
It is hoped that eventually educational policy makers and administrators will
streamline the implementation of these performance indicators into their national
education policies and information systems management. It is envisaged to provide
not only a snapshot of current conditions but a stimulus for change.

Performance indicators in education have traditionally focused on academic results,

such as the League Tables in the UK. There are very few comparable standards and
measurements for ICT penetration and utilisation in education on a national basis.
 Key findings on performance indicators for ICT in education in other countries are
highlighted below:
• Second Information Technology in Education Study (SITES), as part of Industry
Canada’s SchoolNet and Computers for Schools programmes shows a clear
example of how the SSQS can work. SITES was developed to address the
increasing use of ICT in Canada’s school system and challenges faced. In an effort
to generate vital data, Canada, along with 27 other countries participated in SITES.
SITES provides valuable benchmark information against which future progress
can be measured. The survey captures data on the implementation of ICT in
10 education systems at different stages.

• Typically, national initiatives are part of a broader regional or international

benchmarking programme. The guide developed by the Organisation for Economic
Co-Operation and Development (OECD), “Education at a Glance – OECD
Indicators”, is an example of a collection of indicators that represent the consensus
of professional thinking on how to measure the current state of education
internationally.

• UNESCO’s Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education provides a situational
analysis regarding the development and impact of ICT in Education. It offers
methods of collecting indicators, comparisons of indicator themes in selected
countries as well as several case studies on the use and impact of ICT in
education.
• One of the users of UNESCO’s programme is African SchoolNet. The African
Education Knowledge Warehouse (AEKW) is a pan-African education portal
which services African SchoolNet practitioners, policymakers and school-based
communities on ICTs in education across Africa.

• In Europe, the eEurope+ Final Progress Report provided a set of indicators to

benchmark the introduction of new technologies into education and everyday life.
The report showed that all Acceding and Candidate Countries have made significant
efforts towards the implementation of a knowledge-based society but also highlights
the need to stimulate the development of interactive, multi-media rich and
11
multilingual content, as a driver for broadband deployment. The implementation of
e-government services, the integration of ICT training into every students’ education
and the deployment of lifelong ICT training were other measures recommended.

STRATEG IC OV ERV IEW OF THE S MA RT S C H OOL

Q U ALI FICAT ION STANDARDS (S S QS )
The SSQS is unique in that it is possibly the first set of indicators co-created by the
MoE and MDeC a government organisation for national use and development, as
opposed to international comparison and benchmarking.

While locally developed and driven, the SSQS is globally positioned, as it is consistent
with the 2003 World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in Geneva which
 specifically highlighted the need for effective performance monitoring and evaluation
tools on the performance of ICT for Development programmes, particularly in the
education sector.

Objectives of the SSQS:

• To increase utilisation of ICT in schools
• To develop a system (set of indicators) to measure ICT integration in administration
and teaching and learning
• To provide a basis for policy planning and programme improvements
12 • To raise standards in education
• To serve as a catalyst for educational change
• To empower teachers and learners

In any transformation exercise, benchmarks and indicators of success and failure are
required to measure the way we conduct our work, projects and programmes. When
the exercise is transforming education through the use of ICTs, indicators focused on
ICT are given emphasis.

Efforts to integrate ICT in education are widespread globally, but to determine the
national impact of ICT, a localised set of indicators or criteria is required for
measurement and ranking. Performance indicators to monitor the use and outcomes
of technologies also provide useful information for responding to challenges that may
arise.
The relationships between the technology use and educational development,
empowerment of teachers, changes in teaching and learning processes, and student
learning are demonstrated through the use of indicators. It is important to note that
using technology is not an end in itself, but a means to promote educational
outcomes, creativity, empowerment of learners and teachers, and the development
of resourceful learners and problem solvers. In order to assess these outcomes,
appropriate measurement tools and indicators are needed.

To transform a school, no matter how academically brilliant, from a non-ICT oriented

teaching and learning environment, to one which maximises and promotes the 13
teaching and learning advantages of ICT to the fullest, clear direction and guidance
must be given. This includes the training of both the educators (who use the system)
and the technicians (who maintain the system).

Strategically, the thrust of the entire programme is one of monitoring and guidance (as
a form of subtle and gentle enforcement) activities simultaneously backed by value-
adding (or reinforcement) support in identified weak areas.

Monitoring Programmes – are “coaching” activities carried out on-line (via computers)
and on-site.
 Value-Adding Programmes – are “reinforcement” activities which include training
workshops and infrastructure support, such as:
• Smart School Champion for School Leaders
• Professional Development for teachers
• Technical Support Enhancement
• Peer Coaching and Buddy System
• Change Management programmes
• Smart Brigade

14 STAR RANKING METHODOLOGY

The Star Ranking is a monitoring tool. A 4-step methodology has been developed for
assessing the 10,000 schools and deriving the Star Ranking of each school:

1. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

The first step to the methodology is to establish Key Performance Indicators of the
ICT Focus Areas. These KPIs set the accepted conditions and assign scores upon
which the Star Ranking is based.

2. Survey and Appraisal

Having established the KPIs, each Smart School will be surveyed to ascertain the
conditions of each ICT Focus Area. The survey will be conducted once a year
through the online monitoring system that captures live data.
3. Smart School Qualification Standards (SSQS)
The SSQS outlines the ICT Focus Areas each school is appraised on. Each area
carries its own weightage reflecting its significance in the SSQS. The areas are:
 Utilisation 40%
 Human Capital 40%
 Applications 10%
 Technology Infrastructure 10%

15
To qualify as a Smart School, the 10,000 schools must achieve the minimum
conditions 3-star specified for each KPI within the ICT Focus Areas.

 Utilisation: monitors the extent to which the school makes use of ICT in its
operation, management, teaching and learning activities. Utilisation accounts
for 40% of the Star Ranking appraisal as it forms the integral part of
transformation.
Examples of KPIs within Utilisation are: Student-to-PC contact hours,
courseware/ICT-based content integration by teachers for core subjects, School
Management System updating, Educational TV content and Learning
Management System (LMS) usage, and student completion of self-learning
materials.
  Human Capital: refers to the competency of end-users in integrating ICT in
teaching, learning and/or administration. Human Capital accounts for 40% of
the Star Ranking appraisal.
Examples of KPIs for Human Capital are: ICT Co-ordinators’ competency,
core-subject teachers’ ICT competency, use of ICT in dissemination of
information, smart partnerships, use of multimedia in teaching, the students’
ICT competency and awareness of the availability of educational courseware.

 Applications: refers to the various applications provided by the MoE and others
16 that the schools have adopted. It accounts for 10% of the Star Ranking appraisal.
Examples of KPIs for Applications are: at least 5 modules used for school
management, LCMS and MoE courseware are used for teaching, and website
presence and maintenance.

 Technology Infrastructure: not only audits the provision of the infrastructure

itself (provided by MoE) but also looks at maintenance and support of the
infrastructure within the schools. As a large portion of the infrastructure
provision is determined by MoE at the central level, this focus area accounts
for only 10% of the Star Ranking appraisal.
Examples of KPIs for Technology Infrastructure are: PC-to-Student ratio, PC-to-
Teacher ratio, Projector-to-class ratio, PC accessibility, LAN & WAN, and
technology downtime.
4. Star Ranking
The goal of this exercise is the once in a year Star Ranking, where all schools are
measured in the ICT Focus Areas and ranked between 1 to 5 star.

Schools which do not qualify for any Star Ranking may regard that as a clear
indication that they do not qualify as smart schools, and urgent steps need to be
taken to regain position on the development track.

Schools which show a steady improvement or maintain an exemplary standard in

the key areas will be positioned as ideal Smart Schools. 17

It is hoped that the 10,000 schools will make use of the ranking system to qualify
themselves as 5-Star Smart Schools.

The Star Ranking is awarded based on a unified score from the indicators to:
 Serve as a device for monitoring
 Provide information for specific actions to uplift the integration of ICT in
schools
 Facilitate decision and policy making towards making all schools smart
 The Star Ranking are:

Basic Schools with merely basic conditions across all

indicators

Basic Plus Star ranking for schools with basic features, with
slight additions but falling below the average
conditions for all indicators.
18
Median Star ranking awarded to Smart Schools with fair or
average conditions of all the indicators.

Advanced A seal of approval awarded to Smart Schools with

good or advanced conditions for most indicators.

Advanced Plus The highest approval ranking, awarded to Smart

Schools with advanced conditions for most
indicators.
 Smart School Qualification Standards (SSQS)
School BASIC BASIC PLUS MEDIAN ADVANCED ADVANCED PLUS
Smart Ranking
Indicators     
School
Indicators (0 < x < 20%) (20% ≤ x < 40%) (40% ≤ x < 60%) (60% ≤ x < 80% (x ≥ 80%)

Utilisation 1. Usage of ICT-based applications by 1 application 2 applications 3 applications 4 applications ≥ 5 applications

(40%) administrators in school management
– ICT integration in
2. Usage of Web-based School Management once a month once in 3 weeks once in 2 weeks once a week daily
teaching, learning
System/other ICT-based system by
and school
administrators in school management
administration
3. Usage of ICT equipment (other than once a month once in 3 weeks once in 2 weeks once a week daily
computer) by administrators in school
management
4. Usage of electronic tools (email, SMS, once a month once in 3 weeks once in 2 weeks once a week daily
etc) for dissemination of information by
administrators 19
5. Integration of technology-based materials/ ≤ 1 period 2-3 periods 4-5 periods 6-7 periods ≥ 8 periods
platforms by teachers in teaching & per month per month per month per month per month
learning for each subject
6. Usage of Learning Management System by ≤ 60 minutes ≤ 61-120 minutes ≤ 121-180 minutes ≤ 181-240 minutes ≥ 241 minutes
teachers in teaching & learning per month per month per month per month per month
7. Usage of Educational TV content by 1 period 2 periods 3 periods 4 Periods ≥ 5 periods
teachers in teaching & learning per month per month per month per month per month
8. Usage of ICT equipment (other than 1 period 2 periods 3 periods 4 periods ≥ 5 periods
computer & TV) by teachers in teaching per month per month per month per month per month
& learning
9. Usage of internet by teachers for seeking ≤ 60 minutes ≤ 61-120 minutes ≤ 121-180 minutes ≤ 181-240 minutes ≥ 241 minutes
information in teaching & learning per month per month per month per month per month
10. Usage of ICT-based content by teachers to Once in Once a month Once in Once in Once a week
develop new teaching materials 2 months 3 weeks 2 weeks
11. Student-PC contact hours during school ≤ 60 minutes ≤ 61-120 minutes ≤ 121-180 minutes ≤ 181-240 minutes ≥ 241 minutes
hours for any subjects per month per month per month per month per month
12. Usage of Learning Management System 1 assignment 2-3 assignments 4-5 assignments 6-7 assignments ≥ 8 assignments
by student per month per month per month per month per month
13. Usage of self-learning modules by student 1 title 2-3 titles 4-5 titles 6-7 titles ≥ 8 titles
per month per month per month per month per month
 School BASIC BASIC PLUS MEDIAN ADVANCED ADVANCED PLUS
Smart Ranking
Indicators     
School
Indicators (0 < x < 20%) (20% ≤ x < 40%) (40% ≤ x < 60%) (60% ≤ x < 80% (x ≥ 80%)

Utilisation 14. Student-PC contact hours after school ≤ 60 minutes ≤ 61-120 minutes ≤ 121-180 minutes ≤ 181-240 minutes ≥ 241 minutes
(40%) hours for learning purposes per week per week per week per week per week
– ICT integration in
15. Usage of Resource Centre/Access Centre Once a month Once in 3 weeks Once in 2 weeks Once a week Daily
teaching, learning
for ICT-related work by student
and school
administration 16. Update of activities and data on the Once a year Once in 6 months Once every Monthly Weekly
relevant modules by IT Coordinator in 3 months
School Management System/other ICT-
based system
17. Update of school website/portal by IT Once a year Once in 6 months Once every Monthly Weekly
Coordinator 3 months
20
HUMAN CAPITAL 1. ICT competency level of Administrator Very Low Low Average High Very High
(40%) 2. Number of ICT-related courses attended 1 2 3 4 ≥5
– ICT competency
by Administrator in the last 3 years
of Administrators,
Teachers, 3. Frequency of ICT Smart-partnership once a year twice per year 4 times a year 6 times a year monthly
IT Coordinators programme with community
and Students 4. Number of in-house ICT training activities 1-2 per year 3-4 per year 5-6 per year 7-8 per year ≥ 9 per year
conducted by school
5. Frequency of dissemination of information once a year twice a year 6 times a year monthly weekly
regarding ICT by Administrator
6. Frequency of change management once a year twice a year 4 times a year 6 times a year monthly
conducted by Administrator
7. Number of types of ICT-related support 1 per year 2 per year 3 per year 4 per year ≥ 5 per year
from the community
8. Number of innovative programmes 1 per year 2 per year 3 per year 4 per year ≥ 5 per year
conducted in schools
9. ICT competency level of teachers Very Low Low Average High Very High
10. Additional ICT competency level of Very Low Low Average High Very High
teachers
 School BASIC BASIC PLUS MEDIAN ADVANCED ADVANCED PLUS
Smart Ranking
School Indicators     
Indicators (0 < x < 20%) (20% ≤ x < 40%) (40% ≤ x < 60%) (60% ≤ x < 80% (x ≥ 80%)

HUMAN CAPITAL 11. Number of ICT-related courses attended 1 2 3 4 ≥5

(40%) by teachers in the last 3 years
– ICT competency
12. Number of ICT workshops/peer coaching/ 1 per year 2 per year 3 per year 4 per year ≥ 5 per year
of Administrators,
knowledge sharing activities conducted
Teachers,
by teachers
IT Coordinators
and Students 13. Frequency of dissemination of information once a year twice a year 6 times a year monthly weekly
regarding ICT by teachers
14. ICT competency level of IT Coordinator Very Low Low Average High Very High
15. Number of ICT-related courses attended 1 2 3 4 ≥5
by IT Coordinator in the last 3 years
16. Number of in-house ICT training courses 1-2 per year 3-4 per year 5-6 per year ≥ 9 per year 21
7-8 per year
conducted by IT Coordinator
17. Frequency of dissemination of information once a year twice a year 6 times a year monthly weekly
regarding ICT by IT Coordinator
18. ICT competency level of students Very Low Low Average High Very High
19. Additional ICT competency level of Very Low Low Average High Very High
students
20. Number of sources Student refers to for 1 2 3 4 ≥5
ICT-related knowledge

APPLICATION 1. Number of modules for school management 3 4 5 6 >6

(10%) 2. Number of application for the school 1 2 3 4 >4
– IT Coordinator
for the schools 3. A system to manage learning content for 1 1 1 1 1
teaching and learning
4. Number of software for the development 1 2 3 4 >4
of teaching and learning materials
5. Type of courseware/ICT-based learning 2 type 3 types 4 types 5 types > 5 types
material
 School BASIC BASIC PLUS MEDIAN ADVANCED ADVANCED PLUS
Smart Ranking Indicators     
School
Indicators (0 < x < 20%) (20% ≤ x < 40%) (40% ≤ x < 60%) (60% ≤ x < 80% (x ≥ 80%)

APPLICATION 6. A website for the school One school One school One school One website, One website,
(10%) website or a blog website/a blog website, updated updated with two updated with all of
– IT Coordinator and updated with one of the of the following the following
for the schools following criteria: criteria: criteria:
• maintained • maintained • maintained
• interactive • interactive • interactive
• downloadable • downloadable • downloadable
materials materials materials
7. An email application for the school
Email application Email application Email application Email application Email application
for administrators for administrators for all staff for all staff and for all staff, directory
and teachers directory for the and email groups
22 school for the school

INFRASTRUCTURE 1. Number of functioning computers in the 5-10 11-15 16-20 21-30 ≥31
(10%) school
– Administrators 2. Computer: Pupil ratio 1: >20 1: 15-19 1: 10-14 1: 5-9 1: 1-2
and IT
Coordinators 3. Computer/Notebook: Teacher Ratio 1: >45 1: >22 1: 7-9 1: >4-6 1: ≤ 3
4. LCD Projector: Class Ratio 1: >20 1: 16-20 1: 11-15 1: 5-10 ≤5
5. Accessible computer locations 1 2 3 4 5
6. Percentage of Computers not working ≥ 50% 30% - < 50% 20% - < 30% 10% - < 20% < 10%
more than 24 hours
7. Local Area Network connectivity ≤2 3-4 5-6 >6 ≥7 & wireless
8. Standard maximum downtime >7 times/week 5-6 times/week 3-4 times/week 1-2 times/week 0 time/rarely
9. Internet accessibility 1 location 2 locations 3 locations 4 locations ≥5 locations
10. Frequency of Maintenance activity Once a month Once every Once every Once a week Daily
3 weeks 2 weeks