Universal Basic Skills - What Countries Stand to Gain
•Télécharger en tant que PPTX, PDF•
16 j'aime•42,701 vues
(Andreas Schleicher - Director, OECD Directorate for Education and Skills) While access to schooling has expanded around the world, many countries have not realised the hoped-for improvements in economic and social well-being. Access to education by itself is an incomplete goal for development; many students leave the education system without basic proficiency in literacy and numeracy. As the world coalesces around new sustainable development targets towards 2030, the focus in education is shifting towards access and quality. Using projections based on data from the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and other international student assessments, this report offers a glimpse of the stunning economic and social benefits that all countries, regardless of their national wealth, stand to gain if they ensure that every child not only has access to education but, through that education, acquires at least the baseline level of skills needed to participate fully in society.
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
Similaire à Universal Basic Skills - What Countries Stand to Gain
Similaire à Universal Basic Skills - What Countries Stand to Gain (20)
Plus de EduSkills OECD
Plus de EduSkills OECD (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Universal Basic Skills - What Countries Stand to Gain
- 1. 11 The post-2015 education agenda Universal basic skills What countries stand to gain 11 May 2015, London Andreas Schleicher
- 2. 22 Focus on quality How well do today’s schools prepare for tomorrow’s world? What do 15-year-olds know in math and science… …and what can they do with what they know?
- 3. Singapore Hong Kong-ChinaChinese Taipei Korea Macao-China Japan Liechtenstein Switzerland Netherlands Estonia Finland Canada Poland Belgium Germany Viet Nam Austria Australia IrelandSlovenia DenmarkNew Zealand Czech Republic France United Kingdom Iceland LatviaLuxembourg Norway Portugal ItalySpain Russian Fed.Slovak Republic United States LithuaniaSwedenHungary Croatia Israel Greece SerbiaTurkey Romania Bulgaria U.A.E. Kazakhstan Thailand Chile Malaysia Mexico 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530 540 550 560 570 580 Mean score High mathematics performance Low mathematics performance … Shanghai-China performs above this line (613) Average performance of 15-year-olds in Mathematics (PISA) Fig I.2.13 Below PISA Level 2 At this level, students can answer questions involving familiar contexts where all relevant information is present and the questions are clearly defined. They are able to identify information and to carry out routine procedures according to direct instructions in explicit situations. They can perform actions that are a lmost always obvious and follow immediately from the given stimuli.
- 4. Low mathematics performance Iran* Costa Rica Uruguay Montenegro Bahrain* Georgia* Brazil JordanArgentina Albania Tunisia Macedonia Saudi Arabia* Colombia QatarIndonesia Botswana* Peru Oman* Morocco* Honduras* South Africa* Ghana* 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 * Substituted from TIMSS
- 7. The world is no longer divided between rich and well- educated countries, and poor and badly-educated ones 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Qatar Oman SaudiArabia Bahrain Malaysia Kazakhstan UAE Israel Greece SlovakRepublic Sweden Luxembourg Hungary Iceland UnitedStates Portugal Italy RussianFederation Lithuania Norway France Spain NewZealand Belgium UnitedKingdom CzechRepublic Austria Denmark Australia Slovenia Latvia Germany Netherlands Ireland Switzerland Canada Poland ChineseTaipei Finland Japan Singapore Korea Estonia Hong-KongChina High income does not protect against poor education Share of 15-year-olds below PISA Level 2 in high-income countries (>25K$) (reading, math and science)
- 8. Regular but moderate physical exercise is good for our health What happens when muscles are exercised? Circle “Yes” or “No” for each statement. Does this happen when muscles are exercised? Yes or No? Muscles get an increased flow of blood. Yes / No Fats are formed in the muscles. Yes / No Answering this question correctly corresponds to a difficulty of 386 score points on the PISA science scale. Across countries, 82% of students answered correctly. This question assesses students’ competency of explaining phenomena scientifically. % students by country who answered correctly Finland 93 Hungary 91 Russian Federation 90 Slovenia 89 Latvia 88 Czech Republic 88 Iceland 88 Greece 87 Portugal 87 Croatia 86 Spain 86 Italy 85 Liechtenstein 85 Hong Kong- China 85 Australia 85 Canada 84 Denmark 84 Serbia 84 New Zealand 84 Belgium 84 Poland 84 Netherlands 84 Tunisia 83 Slovak Republic 83 United Kingdom 83 OECD average 82 Sweden 82 Switzerland 82 Chile 82 Turkey 82 Thailand 81 Macao-China 81 Bulgaria 81 Jordan 80 Israel 80 Japan 80 Luxembourg 79 Austria 79 France 79 Mexico 78 Germany 77 Estonia 77 Chinese Taipei 77 Norway 76 United States 76 Romania 76 Montenegro 76 Ireland 76 Argentina 75 Lithuania 73 Azerbaijan 72 Brazil 71 Korea 68 Colombia 63 Kyrgyzstan 57 Indonesia 54 Qatar 53
- 9. Mei-Ling from Singapore was preparing to go to South Africa for 3 months as an exchange student. She needed to change some Singapore dollars (SGD) into South African rand (ZAR). Question: Mei-Ling found out that the exchange rate between Singapore dollars and South African rand was: 1 SGD = 4.2 ZAR Mei-Ling changed 3000 Singapore dollars into South African rand at this exchange rate. How much money in South African rand did Mei-Ling get? Answer: ________________________ % students by country who answered correctly Liechtenstein 95 Macao- China 93 Finland 90 France 89 Hong Kong-China 89 Sweden 89 Austria 87 Switzerland 87 Belgium 87 Czech Republic 87 Canada 86 Slovak Republic 86 Iceland 86 Denmark 85 Russian Federation 85 Luxembourg 85 Netherlands 85 Hungary 84 Ireland 83 Germany 83 Australia 81 Korea 81 Latvia 80 New Zealand 80 OECD average 80 Japan 79 Spain 79 Serbia 79 Norway 77 Poland 77 Portugal 74 United Kingdom 74 Greece 73 Italy 71 Uruguay 71 Mexico 60 Thailand 60 Turkey 60 Indonesia 59 Tunisia 55 United States 54 Brazil 37 12600 zAR Answering this question correctly corresponds to a difficulty of 406 score points on the PISA mathematics scale. Across countries, 80% of students answered correctly. To answer the question correctly students have to draw on skills from the reproduction competency cluster.
- 10. Figure 1 shows changing levels of Lake Chad, in Saharan North Africa. Lake Chad disappeared completely in about 20,000BC, during the last Ice Age. In about 11,000 BC it reappeared. Today, its level is about the same as it was in AD 1000.
- 11. Figure 2 aurochs giraffe buffalo Saharan rock art and changing patterns of wildlife rhinoceros hippopotamus elephant ostrich gazelle cattle dog horse camel 8000 BC 7000 BC 6000 BC 5000 BC 4000 BC 3000 BC 2000 BC 1000 BC 0 AD 1000 Question: Figure 2 is based on the assumption that: A. the animals in the rock art were present in the area at the time they were drawn. B. the artists who drew the animals were highly skilled. C. the artists who drew the animals were able to travel widely. D. there was no attempt to domesticate the animals which were depicted in the rock art. Figure 2 shows Saharan rock art (ancient drawings or paintings found on the walls of caves) and changing patterns of wildlife Answering this question correctly corresponds to a difficulty of 397 score points on the PISA reading scale. Across countries, 77% of students answered correctly. To do so, they interpreted the text correctly. • % students by country who answered correctly Finland 87 Hungary 85 Korea 85 Netherlands 84 Austria 83 Sweden 82 Spain 82 France 82 Belgium 81 Czech Republic 80 Denmark 80 Canada 80 Germany 80 Australia 80 Liechtenstein 79 Japan 79 Italy 79 Switzerland 78 New Zealand 78 Portugal 78 OECD average 77 United Kingdom 76 Poland 73 Ireland 72 Luxembourg 72 Norway 72 United States 71 Iceland 70 Greece 68 Latvia 68 Brazil 63 Russian Federation 59 Mexico 49
- 12. 1212 Methods Some methodological considerations to estimate the impact of improved basic skills on long-term economic growth
- 13. • The projections assume that higher educational achievement allows a country to keep on growing at a higher rate in the long run – Education increases the innovative capacity of the economy through developing new ideas and new technologies – A given level of education can lead to a continuing stream of new ideas, thus making it possible for education to affect growth even when no new education is added to the economy . Underlying growth model
- 14. • An aggregate production function where the output of the macro economy is a direct function of capital and labour – The human capital component of growth comes through accumulation of more education that implies the economy moves from one steady state level to another; once at the new level, education exerts no further influence on growth . Alternative growth models
- 15. • Improvements will occur steadily – from today’s performance up to reaching the post-2015 goals in 2030 • It will take another 40 years until the more skilled workers replace the existing workforce • The growth rate is calculated each year into the future based on the average skill of workers • Future gains in GDP are discounted to the present with a 3% discount rate – (so that the projections are directly comparable to current levels of GDP). Assumptions
- 16. • Annual improvement by 1.67 PISA points per year (=25 points by 2030) and full enrolment • Present value of added GDP would be 340% of the country’s current GDP over the next 80 years (or on average 7.3% higher GDP each year) • By 2095, GDP would be 30% higher than with current skill levels – This is equivalent to an annual growth rate that is 0.5 percentage points higher than at current skill levels. 18 An example Country Improvement/y Montenegro 1.7 Chile 1.9 Serbia 2.2 Poland 2.6 Italy 2.7 Portugal 2.8 Mexico 3.1 Tunisia 3.1 Turkey 3.2 Dubai (UAE) 3.7 Singapore 3.8 Brazil 4.1 Bulgaria 4.2 Shanghai-China 4.2 Israel 4.2 Romania 4.9 Albania 5.6 U.A.E. * 5.9 Malaysia 8.1 Kazakhstan 9 Qatar 9.2
- 17. 19 Skills and growth
- 18. • Couldn’t higher growth cause higher achievement? – Correlation between education spending and student performance is weak, so it is unlikely that the relationship comes from growth induced resources lifting student achievement – For a subset of countries, the period of testing has been separated from the subsequent period of observed economic impacts, but the impact was even bigger • Couldn’t other factors besides cognitive skills be responsible for countries’ growth? – In an extensive investigation of alternative model specifications, different measures of cognitive skills, various groupings of countries (including some that eliminate regional differences), and specific subperiods of economic growth have been employed but the results show high consistency in the alternative estimates, in both quantitative impacts and statistical significance – Neither do measures of geographical location, political stability, capital stock and population growth significantly affect the estimated impact of cognitive skills 20 Causality in brief
- 19. • How do we know international differences in test scores reflect school policies and not things like health and nutrition differences in the population or cultural differences? – This concern has been addressed by focusing attention just on the variations in achievement that arise directly from institutional characteristics of each country’s school system (exit examinations, autonomy, relative teacher salaries and private schooling). When the analysis is limited in this way, the estimation of the growth relationship yields essentially the same results • Do changes in test scores over time relate to changes in growth rates? – For 12 OECD countries, the magnitude of trends in education performance can be related to the magnitude of trends in growth rates over time. This investigation provides more evidence of the causal influence of cognitive skills. 21 Causality in brief
- 20. • What if achievement is simply a reflection of other aspects of the economy and not the driving force in growth? – One way to test this is to consider the implications of differences in measured skills within a single economy. This was done by comparing immigrants to the United states who have been educated in their home countries with immigrants educated just in the United states. – This comparison finds that the cognitive skills seen in the immigrant’s home country lead to higher incomes, but only if the immigrant was in fact educated in the home country. Immigrants from the same home country who are schooled in the United states see no economic return to home-country test scores – a finding that pinpoints the value of better schools 22 Causality in brief
- 21. 2323 The high cost of low educational performance What if the World delivered on the post-2015 development goals? The economic value of getting every 15-year-old to complete at least PISA Level 1
- 22. The economic value of improvement 0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500% 600% 700% 800% 900% 1000% 1100% 1200% 1300% 1400% Baseline skills Full enrolment without increase in quality Baseline skills and full enrolment Lower middle income countries Upper middle income countries High income non-OECD High income OECD Value of improvement in terms of current GDP over working life of today’s 15-year-olds The increase in GDP among high income countries would still exceed total current spending on schooling
- 23. 25 The economic value of improvement
- 24. Low mathematics performance Iran* Costa Rica Uruguay Montenegro Bahrain* Georgia* Brazil JordanArgentina Albania Tunisia Macedonia Saudi Arabia* Colombia QatarIndonesia Botswana* Peru Oman* Morocco* Honduras* South Africa* Ghana* 260 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 * Substituted from TIMSS 3880% GDP 4,526 bn$ 1427% GDP 2,459 bn$ 751% GDP 23,841 bn$
- 25. Singapore Hong Kong-ChinaChinese Taipei Korea Macao-China Japan Liechtenstein Switzerland Netherlands Estonia Finland Canada Poland Belgium Germany Viet Nam Austria Australia IrelandSlovenia DenmarkNew Zealand Czech Republic France United Kingdom Iceland LatviaLuxembourg Norway Portugal ItalySpain Russian Fed.Slovak Republic United States LithuaniaSwedenHungary Croatia Israel Greece SerbiaTurkey Romania Bulgaria U.A.E. Kazakhstan Thailand Chile Malaysia Mexico High mathematics performance Low mathematics performance 86% GDP 402 bn$ 153% GDP 27,929 bn$ 551% GDP 12,448 bn$ 375% GDP 2,415 bn$ 143% GDP 3,650 bn$ 304% GDP 1,667 bn$ 38% GDP 209 bn$
- 26. Socially equitable distribution of learning opportunities High mathematics performance Low mathematics performance Strong socio-economic impact on student performance Singapore Hong Kong-ChinaChinese Taipei Korea Macao-China Japan Liechtenstein Switzerland Netherlands Estonia Finland Canada Poland Belgium Germany Viet Nam Austria Australia IrelandSlovenia DenmarkNew Zealand Czech Republic France United Kingdom Iceland LatviaLuxembourg Norway Portugal ItalySpain Russian Fed.Slovak Republic United States LithuaniaSwedenHungary Croatia Israel Greece SerbiaTurkey Romania Bulgaria U.A.E. Kazakhstan Thailand Chile Malaysia Mexico
- 27. AustraliaAustria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Singapore Hong Kong-ChinaChinese Taipei Macao-China Liechtenstein Viet Nam Latvia Russian Fed. Lithuania Croatia Serbia Romania Bulgaria United Arab Emirates Kazakhstan Thailand Malaysia 02468101214161820222426 Socially equitable distribution of learning opportunities Strong socio-economic impact on student performance
- 28. AustraliaAustria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Australia Austria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US 2012 Socially equitable distribution of learning opportunities Strong socio-economic impact on student performance
- 29. AustraliaAustria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Australia Austria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US
- 30. -10 -5 0 5 10 15 Portugal Spain Switzerland Belgium Korea Luxembourg Germany Greece Japan Australia UnitedKingdom NewZealand France Netherlands Denmark Italy Austria CzechRepublic Hungary Norway Iceland Ireland Mexico Finland Sweden UnitedStates Poland SlovakRepublic Salary as % of GDP/capita Instruction time 1/teaching time 1/class size Contribution of various factors to upper secondary teacher compensation costs, per student as a percentage of GDP per capita (2004) Percentage points Difference with OECD average
- 31. 3333 Excellence and equity Excellence and equity are compatible goals in the post-2015 agenda
- 32. • Basic skills for all or cultivating top achievers? – The impact of the basic-skills share does not vary significantly with the initial level of development – The impact of the top-performing share is significantly larger in countries that have more scope to catch up to the most productive countries (the process of economic convergence is accelerated in countries with larger shares of high-performing students). Excellence and equity
- 33. AustraliaAustria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Australia Austria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US
- 34. AustraliaAustria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Australia Austria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Singapore Shanghai Singapore 2003 - 2012 Chile 2003 Turkey 2003
- 35. Change in performance between PISA 2003 and 2012 Indonesia Thailand Russian Fed. United States Latvia Spain Norway Luxembourg Ireland Austria Switzerland Japan Liechtenstein Korea Brazil Tunisia Mexico Uruguay Turkey Greece Italy Portugal Hungary Poland Slovak Republic OECD average Germany Sweden France Denmark Iceland Czech Republic New Zealand Australia Macao-China Belgium Canada Netherlands Finland Hong Kong-China -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 350 400 450 500 550 600 Averageannualmathematicsscorechange Average mathematics performance in PISA 2003 ImprovingperformanceDeterioratingperformance PISA 2003 performance below the OECD average PISA 2003 performance above the OECD average Fig I.2.18 37 B
- 36. 3838 Skills and inclusive growth Achieving basic skills would make economic growth more inclusive
- 37. • Achieving universal basic skills will make economic growth more inclusive – The increase in average earnings from attaining universal basic skills amounts to some 4.2% across the 28 countries with universal enrolment in secondary schools. – This increase is accompanied by a 5.2% average reduction in the achievement- induced part of the standard deviation of earnings • Universal basic skills will also expand the size of the economy, and thus differs from simple tax and redistribution schemes that might change income distribution but would not add to societal output – Policies to improve knowledge capital will also promote inclusion and a more equitable income distribution Inclusive growth
- 38. 4040 Why poverty need not be destiny It’s not just about poor kids in poor neighborhoods but about many kids in many neighborhoods The country where students go to class matters more than what social class students come from
- 39. 4141 PISA mathematics performance by decile of social background 300325350375400425450475500525550575600625650675 Mexico Chile Greece Norway Sweden Iceland Israel Italy UnitedStates Spain Denmark Luxembourg Australia Ireland UnitedKingdom Hungary Canada Finland Austria Turkey Liechtenstein CzechRepublic Estonia Portugal Slovenia SlovakRepublic NewZealand Germany Netherlands France Switzerland Poland Belgium Japan Macao-China HongKong-China Korea Singapore ChineseTaipei Shanghai-China Source: PISA 2012
- 40. Australia Brazil Chile Estonia Spain France Iceland Israel Italy Japan Korea Bulgaria Malaysia Mexico Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Romania Serbia Singapore Slovak Republic Latvia United States 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 %studentsfromdisadvantagedbackgrounds thepercentageofstudentswithavalueofESCSlowerthan-1 % principals who reported that more than 30% of their students are from socioeconomically disadvantaged homes Social background – principal and students Size of bullet represents impact of social background on student performance
- 41. 4343 Educational improvement Making sure skills are put to good use
- 42. 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 Reading at work Writing at work Numeracy at work ICT at work Problem solving at work Average United States Japan Use of skills at work Most frequent use = 4 Least frequent use = 0 Indexofuse
- 43. Australia Austria Canada Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Ireland Italy Japan Korea Netherlands Norway Poland Slovak Republic Spain Sweden United States England/N. Ireland (UK) 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 (log)Labourproductivity Use of reading skills at work 45 Labour productivity and the use of reading skills at work
- 44. • Obtaining the projected gains will require a variety of structural changes in each country’s economy so that the new, more skilled workers can be productively absorbed into the labour force. These changes are assumed to be similar to the productivity improvements seen over past half century 46 Assumptions 0.94 0.89 2.55 1.84 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Openness to international trade Protection against expropriation risk Closed economy Open economy Least protection Most protection 1.61* 0.95 Estimated effect of test scores on growth
- 45. 4848Lessonsfromhighperformers Can we make it happen? It’s everybody’s business Low impact on outcomes High impact on outcomes Low feasibility High feasibility Money pits Must haves Low hanging fruits Quick wins
- 46. 4949Lessonsfromhighperformers Low impact on outcomes High impact on outcomes Low feasibility High feasibility Money pits Must haves Low hanging fruits Quick wins Commitment to universal achievement Gateways, instructional systems Capacity at point of delivery Incentive structures and accountability Resources where they yield most A learning system Coherence
- 47. 5050Lessonsfromhighperformers Low impact on outcomes High impact on outcomes Low feasibility High feasibility Money pits Must haves Low hanging fruits Quick wins Commitment to universal achievement Gateways, instructional systems Capacity at point of delivery Incentive structures and accountability Resources where they yield most A learning system Coherence A commitment to education and the belief that competencies can be learned and therefore all children can achieve Ambitious educational standards and personalization as the approach to heterogeneity in the student body… … as opposed to a belief that students have different destinations to be met with different expectations, and selection/stratification as the approach to heterogeneity Clear articulation who is responsible for ensuring student success and to whom
- 48. United States Poland Hong Kong-China Brazil New Zealand Greece Uruguay United Kingdom Estonia Finland Albania Croatia Latvia Slovak Republic Luxembourg Germany Lithuania Austria Czech Republic Chinese Taipei France Thailand Japan Turkey Sweden Hungary Australia Israel Canada IrelandBulgaria Jordan Chile Macao-China U.A.E. Belgium Netherlands Spain Argentina Indonesia Denmark Kazakhstan Peru Costa Rica Switzerland Montenegro Tunisia Iceland Slovenia Qatar Singapore Portugal Norway Colombia Malaysia Mexico Liechtenstein Korea Serbia Russian Fed. Romania Viet Nam Italy Shanghai-China R² = 0.36 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 -0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 Meanmathematicsperformance Mean index of mathematics self-efficacy OECDaverage Countries where students have stronger beliefs in their abilities perform better in mathematics51 Fig III.4.5
- 49. 5555Lessonsfromhighperformers Low impact on outcomes High impact on outcomes Low feasibility High feasibility Money pits Must haves Low hanging fruits Quick wins Commitment to universal achievement Gateways, instructional systems Capacity at point of delivery Incentive structures and accountability Resources where they yield most A learning system Coherence Clear ambitious goals that are shared across the system and aligned with high stakes gateways and instructional systems Well established delivery chain through which curricular goals translate into instructional systems, instructional practices and student learning (intended, implemented and achieved) High level of metacognitive content of instruction …
- 50. 5656Lessonsfromhighperformers Low impact on outcomes High impact on outcomes Low feasibility High feasibility Money pits Must haves Low hanging fruits Quick wins Commitment to universal achievement Gateways, instructional systems Capacity at point of delivery Incentive structures and accountability Resources where they yield most A learning system Coherence Capacity at the point of delivery Attracting, developing and retaining high quality teachers and school leaders and a work organisation in which they can use their potential Instructional leadership and human resource management in schools Keeping teaching an attractive profession System-wide career development …
- 51. Developing Teaching as a profession Recruit top candidates into the profession Support teachers in continued development of practice Retain and recognise effective teachers – path for growth Improve the societal view of teaching as a profession Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after acc ounting for socio-economic status5757 Capacity at the point of delivery
- 52. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 5858 Teachers' perceptions of the value of teaching Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that teaching profession is a valued profession in society 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Malaysia Singapore Korea AbuDhabi(UAE) Finland Mexico Alberta(Canada) Flanders(Belgium) Netherlands Australia England(UK) Romania Israel UnitedStates Chile Average Norway Japan Latvia Serbia Bulgaria Denmark Poland Iceland Estonia Brazil Italy CzechRepublic Portugal Croatia Spain Sweden France SlovakRepublic Percentageofteachers Above-average performers in PISA
- 53. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 5959 Countries where teachers believe their profession is valued show higher levels of student achievement Relationship between lower secondary teachers' views on the value of their profession in society and the country’s share of top mathematics performers in PISA 2012 Australia Brazil Bulgaria Chile Croatia Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Iceland Israel Italy Japan Korea Latvia Mexico Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Romania Serbia Singapore Slovak Republic Spain Sweden Alberta (Canada) England (UK) Flanders (Belgium) United States 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Shareofmathematicstopperformers Percentage of teachers who agree that teaching is valued in society R2 = 0.24 r= 0.49
- 54. Teacher skills and graduate skills (numeracy) 230 250 270 290 310 330 350 Italy Poland Estonia United States Canada Ireland Korea England (UK) England/N. Ireland (UK) Denmark Northern Ireland (UK) Slovak Republic France Australia Sweden Czech Republic Austria Netherlands Norway Germany Flanders (Belgium) Finland Japan Middle half of the numeracy skill distribution of graduates (16-65 years) PIAAC test scores (numeracy)
- 55. Teacher skills and graduate skills (numeracy) 230 250 270 290 310 330 350 Italy Poland Estonia United States Canada Ireland Korea England (UK) England/N. Ireland (UK) Denmark Northern Ireland (UK) Slovak Republic France Australia Sweden Czech Republic Austria Netherlands Norway Germany Flanders (Belgium) Finland Japan Middle half of the numeracy skill distribution of graduates (16-65 years) Numeracy skills of teachers PIAAC test scores (numeracy)
- 56. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 6262 Teachers Self-Efficacy and Professional Collaboration 11.40 11.60 11.80 12.00 12.20 12.40 12.60 12.80 13.00 13.20 13.40 Never Onceayearorless 2-4timesayear 5-10timesayear 1-3timesamonth Onceaweekormore Teacherself-efficacy(level) Teach jointly as a team in the same class Observe other teachers’ classes and provide feedback Engage in joint activities across different classes Take part in collaborative professional learning
- 57. 6565Lessonsfromhighperformers Low impact on outcomes High impact on outcomes Low feasibility High feasibility Money pits Must haves Low hanging fruits Quick wins Commitment to universal achievement Gateways, instructional systems Capacity at point of delivery Incentive structures and accountability Resources where they yield most A learning system Coherence Incentives, accountability, knowledge management Aligned incentive structures For students How gateways affect the strength, direction, clarity and nature of the incentives operating on students at each stage of their education Degree to which students have incentives to take tough courses and study hard Opportunity costs for staying in school and performing well For teachers Make innovations in pedagogy and/or organisation Improve their own performance and the performance of their colleagues Pursue professional development opportunities that lead to stronger pedagogical practices A balance between vertical and lateral accountability Effective instruments to manage and share knowledge and spread innovation – communication within the system and with stakeholders around it A capable centre with authority and legitimacy to act
- 58. 6666Lessonsfromhighperformers66 Aligning autonomy with accountability
- 59. 6767Lessonsfromhighperformers 67 67 Hong Kong-China Brazil Uruguay Albania Croatia Latvia Lithuania Chinese Taipei ThailandBulgaria Jordan Macao-China UAE Argentina Indonesia Kazakhstan Peru Costa Rica Tunisia Qatar Singapore Colombia Malaysia Serbia Romania Viet Nam Shanghai-China USA Poland New Zealand Greece UK Estonia Finland Slovak Rep. Luxembourg Germany Austria Czech Rep. France Japan Turkey Sweden Hungary Australia Israel Canada Chile Belgium Netherlands Spain Denmark Switzerland Iceland Slovenia Portugal Norway Korea Italy R² = 0.13 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 Mathematicsperformance(scorepoints) Index of school responsibility for curriculum and assessment (index points) Countries that grant schools autonomy over curricula and assessments tend to perform better in mathematics Source: PISA 2012
- 60. No shared math policy Shared math policy 455 460 465 470 475 480 485 Less school autonomy More school autonomy Schools with more autonomy perform better than schools with less autonomy in systems with standardised math policies Score points School autonomy for curriculum and assessment x system's extent of implementing a standardised math policy (e.g. curriculum and instructional materials) Fig IV.1.16
- 61. Schools with more autonomy perform better than schools with less autonomy in systems with more collaboration Teachers don't participate in management Teachers participate in management455 460 465 470 475 480 485 Less school autonomy More school autonomy Score points School autonomy for resource allocation x System's level of teachers participating in school management Across all participating countries and economies Fig IV.1.17
- 62. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Written specification of the school's curriculum and educational goals Written specification of student-performance standards Systematic recording of data, including teacher and student attendance and graduation rates, test results… Internal evaluation/self-evaluation External evaluation Written feedback from students (e.g. regarding lessons, teachers or resources) Teacher mentoring Regular consultation with one or more experts over a period of at least six months with the aim of improving… Implementation of a standardised policy for mathematics % Percentage of students in schools whose principal reported that their schools have the following for quality assurance and improvement: Singapore OECD average Quality assurance and school improvement Fig IV.4.14 71
- 63. 7272Lessonsfromhighperformers Low impact on outcomes High impact on outcomes Low feasibility High feasibility Money pits Must haves Low hanging fruits Quick wins Commitment to universal achievement Gateways, instructional systems Capacity at point of delivery Incentive structures and accountability Resources where they yield most A learning system Coherence Investing resources where they can make most of a difference Alignment of resources with key challenges (e.g. attracting the most talented teachers to the most challenging classrooms) Effective spending choices that prioritise high quality teachers over smaller classes
- 64. 7474 Adequate resources to address disadvantage Disadvantaged schools reported more teacher shortage Advantaged schools reported more teacher shortage -0.5 -0.3 -0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 Korea Estonia Israel Latvia Slovenia Italy Poland Singapore Argentina Netherlands Portugal Colombia France Finland Tunisia Macao-China Spain Greece Switzerland Norway RussianFed. Japan Austria Montenegro Croatia Canada OECDaverage Germany Denmark Hungary UnitedKingdom Luxembourg HongKong-China Belgium Iceland VietNam Ireland UnitedStates Chile CzechRepublic Serbia Turkey Mexico Indonesia Uruguay Shanghai-China SlovakRepublic Sweden Brazil NewZealand Australia ChineseTaipei Meanindexdifference Difference between socio-economically disadvantaged and socio-economically advantaged schools A shortage of qualified teachers is more of concern in disadvantaged schools
- 65. 7575Lessonsfromhighperformers Low impact on outcomes High impact on outcomes Low feasibility High feasibility Money pits Must haves Low hanging fruits Quick wins Commitment to universal achievement Gateways, instructional systems Capacity at point of delivery Incentive structures and accountability Resources where they yield most A learning system Coherence Coherence of policies and practices Alignment of policies across all aspects of the system Coherence of policies over sustained periods of time Consistency of implementation Fidelity of implementation (without excessive control)
- 66. 7676Lessonsfromhighperformers Low impact on outcomes High impact on outcomes Low feasibility High feasibility Money pits Must haves Low hanging fruits Quick wins Commitment to universal achievement Gateways, instructional systems Capacity at point of delivery Incentive structures and accountability Resources where they yield most A learning system Coherence
- 67. 7777Lessonsfromhighperformers Average school systems High performers in PISA Some students learn at high levels All students learn at high levels Uniformity Embracing diversity Curriculum-centred Learner-centred Learning a place Learning an activity Prescription Informed profession
- 68. 7878Lessonsfromhighperformers Some students learn at high levels All students need to learn at high levels Student inclusion Routine cognitive skills Conceptual understanding, complex ways of thinking, ways of working Curriculum, instruction and assessment Standardisation and compliance High-level professional knowledge workers Teacher quality ‘Tayloristic’, hierarchical Flat, collegial Work organisation Primarily to authorities Primarily to peers and stakeholders Accountability What it all means The old bureaucratic system The modern enabling system
- 69. 7979Lessonsfromhighperformers 79 79 Thank you Find out more about this report at – http://www.oecd.org/edu/universal-basic-skills- 9789264234833-en.htm –#UniversalBasicSkills Email: Andreas.Schleicher@OECD.org Twitter: SchleicherEDU and remember: Without data, you are just another person with an opinion
Notes de l'éditeur
- .
- .