b pont effe edinburg 4 may 2015

25
Policy options for greater equity and quality in education: a comparative perspective Beatriz Pont Senior Education Policy Analyst

Upload: beatriz-pont

Post on 08-Aug-2015

83 views

Category:

Education


3 download

TRANSCRIPT

Policy options for greater equity and quality in education: a comparative perspective

Beatriz PontSenior Education Policy Analyst

Investing in equity in education is key

PIKETTY (2014)

Increasing wealth inequalities (r>g) have negative consequences.

Knowledge and skills diffusion are key to productivity growth and reduction of inequality.

For greater convergence in growth, need for progressive wealth tax and invest in education and skills for the more disadvantaged.

CINGANO (2014)

Income inequality has negative impact on further growth Wider gaps in income prevent skills development among low SES and

generate more inequality and prevent growth Inequality affects growth: Undermining education opportunities for low

SES children. lowering social mobility and hampering skills development.

Individual and societal benefits of raising skills

Source: OECD (2013), PIAAC.

Likelihood of positive outcomes among highly literate adults, PIAAC 2012

Education failure imposes high costs to individuals and to society

It limits capacity of economies to grow and innovate

Damages social cohesion and mobility and is expensive:

Higher public health expendituresHigher welfare, increased criminality

.. and the crisis and new economic data has brought equity to the forefront

Reducing school failure pays off

Challenge: Around 1 in 4 15-year-olds do not reach a minimum level of skills (PISA 2012)

Mex

ico

Turk

eyGr

eece

Hung

ary

Slov

ak R

epub

licSw

eden

Uni

ted

Stat

esPo

rtug

alIta

lyLu

xem

bour

gSp

ain

New

Zea

land

Fran

ce

Nor

way

OEC

D av

erag

e 20

03Ic

elan

dCz

ech

Repu

blic

Aust

ralia

Belg

ium

Aust

riaGe

rman

yIre

land

Denm

ark

Net

herla

nds

Pola

ndCa

nada

Switz

erla

ndFi

nlan

dJa

pan

Kore

a

01020304050607080

Percentage of students below Level 2 in 2012Percentage of students below Level 2 in 2003

% of students be-low proficiency

Level 2

Source: OECD PISA 2012 Database.

Challenge: The impact of background on performance is strong (PISA 2012)

Hun

gary

New

Zea

land

Fran

ceIs

rael

Belg

ium

Ger

man

yLu

xem

bour

gCh

ileD

enm

ark

Aust

riaPo

rtug

alCz

ech

Repu

...Sp

ain

Pola

ndO

ECD

ave

...Au

stra

liaIr

elan

dSw

itzer

land

Gre

ece

Slov

enia

Uni

ted

Stat

esN

ethe

rland

sJa

pan

Swed

enIta

lyFi

nlan

dU

nite

d Ki

...M

exic

oCa

nada

Nor

way

Turk

eyKo

rea

Icel

and

Esto

nia

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0Students in the bottom quarter of the ESCS index Immigrant students

Source: OECD PISA 2012 Database.

Relative risk of scoring in bottom quarter in PISA mathematics 2012

Challenge: The share of those who do not complete remains high (EAG 2014)

Mex

ico

Port

ugal

Italy

Chile

1

Den

mar

k

Nor

way

Gre

ece

Fran

ce

Irela

nd

Esto

nia

Ger

man

y

Aust

ria

Switz

erla

nd

Isra

el

Cana

da

Slov

ak R

epu.

..

Pola

nd

0

20

40

60

80

100 25-34 55-64 %

% of those who have not completed upper secondary education, 2012

Source: OECD (2014), Education at a Glance 2014: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, Table A1.2a.

High performing systems combine quality with equity (PISA 2012)

68101214161820222426350

400

450

500

550

600

NetherlandsEstoniaFinland

Japan

Sweden

Australia Canada

Iceland

Norway

Mexico

Korea

Italy

Israel

Germany

TurkeyGreece

Spain

United Kingdom

Czech Republic

Denmark

Slovenia

Ireland

AustriaSwitzerland

Poland

United States

Chile

Hungary

Slovak RepublicPortugal Luxembourg

France New Zealand

Belgium

Percentage of variation in performance explained by the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status

Mea

n m

athe

mati

cs sc

ore

OEC

D a

v-er

age

OECD average

Strong socio-economic

impact on student performance

Socially equitable distribution of

learning opportunities

0 20 000 40 000 60 000 80 000 100 000120 000140 000160 000180 000200 000400

450

500

550

600

447.984415

413.281467422.632355

477.044455481.644744

498.957882

520.545522

466.481430

517.501097

553.766659

487.063181

499.749903

518.070400513.525056

484.319298494.984674

485.321181

518.750335536.406918

501.127422

501.497460

492.795697

522.971758

478.260636

514.745239

493.934231

504.150766

500.026757

481.366786

505.540743

489.373070

530.931004

489.845098

R² = 0.00481005870595552

Average spending per student from the age of 6 to 15 (USD, PPPs) Ma

the

ma

tic

s p

erf

orm

an

ce

on

PIS

A 2

01

2 It is how money is invested that matters

Source: OECD (2015), Education Policy Outlook 2015: Making Reforms Happen.

Spending per student and average math performance, PISA 2012

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status

Fig II.3.311 Making effective reforms happen is key

11

Funding grants

Subsidies for disadvantaged

schools Reforms in school leadership

and teachers

Support to students

from specific populations

Setting national priorities for

education

New middle school reform

National commitment to

ECEC

School improvement

VETreforms

Teacher training reform

OECD countries are using different policy options to improve their education systems…

School evaluation

reform

Student funding

But only around 1 in 10 reported evaluation to gauge impact

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status

Fig II.3.31212 There are clear common policy trends across countries

Key policies implemented across OECD countries by policy lever, 2008-14(based on countries’ self reports)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35%

Students: Raising Outcomes

Institutions: Enhancing quality

Systems: Governing effectively

Policies to achieve more equitable education systems

Source: OECD PISA 2012.

Invest early and through upper secondary

Support low performing

disadvantaged schools

Eliminate system level

obstacles to equity

Avoid system level policies that hinder equity

More equitable

system level policies

ECECAustralia/Canada/

Chile/Mexico/Nordic/

France/Spain

Comprehensive education

and postpone trackingNordic/Austria/Germany

Equivalent upper

secondary pathways

Nordic/AlbertaManage school choice to avoid

inequities Neths/Chile

Make funding responsive to

needs Chile/Netherlands/Australia/

OntarioSource: OECD PISA 2012.

Manage school choice

Opt for higher quality

schools, and might foster efficiency, spur

innovation and raise quality overall.

Choice can result in a greater sorting and

segregation of students by ability,

income and ethnic background.

Choice

Equity

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status

Fig II.3.3

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

76.5262332598113

71.249389025421472.3610292282187

82.7753225457255

47.2460886316524

76.3572840734428

82.321898959712481.4710420934067

91.133490403052

73.590424307814473.4893326457736

62.5622625960757

86.3608156348884

79.6907684339825

74.5645176953318

75.851059225026877.800951265576978.3182468193718

73.5806642976278

56.5338076972942

81.8313747315391

77.5352072037241

90.9572980454197

76.4243860986361

68.5604575765451

64.3522251858872

74.631510712846475.2142148588128

86.8861295209222

82.7492658818095

72.3201437743716

79.3908209086003

73.8155884458266

R² = 0.173535060657998

School competition

Mor

e so

cial

in

clu

-si

on

Less

soc

ial

incl

usio

n

%

Netherlands: Control on the local level with quota / Nijmegen: central subscription system

Belgium (Flemish community): Inter-Network Enrolment

Commission

School competition and social inclusion, PISA 2012

Managing school choice to prevent segregation

Fairness in allocation of resources: better results

-0.5-0.3-0.10.10.30.50.70.91.11.31.5350

400

450

500

550

600

650

R² = 0R² = 0-

Equity in resource allocation (index-point difference)

Mat

hem

atics

per

form

ance

(sco

re p

oint

s)

Less equity

Allocation of resources and PISA mathematics performance, PISA , 2012

Source: OECD PISA 2012.

Netherlands: Performance-based budgeting

in secondary, vocational and tertiary education

(if institution reduces drop out)

Australia: Review of Funding for Schooling (2011)

Chile: Law on Preferential

Subsidies (2008)

UK England:Pupil premium

Insufficient systemic support

Schools’ inadequate response to

student needs

Insufficient support for

staff

Poor manageme

nt

Impact of student’s

socio-economic

background

Wider range of abilities

Challenging school climate

Poor school environmen

tsDemanding learni

ng environme

nt

Inadequate support

systems

Disadvantaged students and schools face concrete challenges

Students may have different opportunities depending on schools they attend

Netherlands

Belgium

Germany

Austria

Japan

Slovak Republic

Ireland

Portugal

Czech

RepublicChile

Mexico

Australia

Turkey

Poland

Canada

Sweden

Finland0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

Students in socio-economically disadvantaged schoolsStudents in socio-economically average schoolsStudents in socio-economically advantaged schools

20

Relative risk of scoring in the bottom quarter of the performance distribution, PISA 2012

Support disadvantaged students and schools

Supporting

disadvantaged

schools

General strategies

IRL/FIN/AUST/N. ZEAL/GER

Supportive school

climates/dataH.

PERF./DK/FR

Quality professionalsAUSTR/NOR

Effective classroom strategiesParental and

community engagement

MX/NETH

General strategies to support school improvement

Source: OECD PISA 2012.

Mex

ico

Port

ugal

Cana

daIc

elan

dU

nite

d St

ates

Chile

Turk

eyU

nite

d Ki

ngdo

mD

enm

ark

Aus

tral

iaSw

itze

rlan

dN

ew Z

eala

ndSw

eden

Isra

elIr

elan

dO

ECD

ave

rage

Spai

nH

unga

ryLu

xem

bour

gEs

toni

aFi

nlan

dBe

lgiu

mKo

rea

Gre

ece

Nor

way

Aus

tria

Net

herl

ands

Ital

yCz

ech

Repu

blic

Japa

nFr

ance

Slov

ak R

epub

licG

erm

any

Slov

enia

Pola

nd

-0.5-0.4-0.3-0.2-0.1

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8

Index of teacher-student relations Index of disciplinary climate

Mean index

Mexico: PEC (2010-13)

Australia: Students First 2014

New Zealand: Student Achievement Function (2010)

UK: Wales: School Improve-

ment 2012N. Ireland: ESGS 2009

Ireland: National Strategy to Improve Literacy and

Numeracy (2011)

Norway: Better Learn-ing Environment (2009-14)

Esto

nia

Icel

and

Kore

aTu

rkey

Nor

way

Cana

daM

exic

oU

nite

d Ki

ngdo

mFi

nlan

dIt

aly

Swed

enJa

pan

Net

herla

nds

Uni

ted

Stat

esSl

oven

iaG

reec

eSw

itzer

land

Irel

and

Aus

tral

iaO

ECD

ave

rage

Pola

ndSp

ain

Czec

h Re

publ

icPo

rtug

alA

ustr

iaD

enm

ark

Chile

Luxe

mbo

urg

Ger

man

yBe

lgiu

mIs

rael

Fran

ceN

ew Z

eala

ndH

unga

rySl

ovak

Rep

ublic

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Increased likelihood of students in the bottom quarter of the ESCS index scoring in the bottom quarter of the mathematics performance distributionIncreased likelihood of immigrant students scoring in the bottom quarter of the mathematics performance distributionRatio

OECD average

New Zealand: Policies to support

Māori/Pasifika populations

(2008-13)

France/Portugal:Education Priority Zones

Austria: New middle

school reform

Germany: National Action Plan

on Integration (2011)

Finland: National Core Curriculum for Instruction Preparing

Immigrants for Basic Education (2009)

Australia: Smarter schools partnership for disadvantaged schools Aboriginal torres islanders action plan.

Strategies to support disadvantaged schools and students

Source: OECD PISA 2012.

Reforms to support the teaching profession

Kore

aFi

nlan

dM

exic

oA

lber

ta ..

.Fl

ande

rs ..

.N

ethe

rl...

Aus

tral

iaEn

glan

d ...

Isra

elU

nite

d St

...Ch

ileA

vera

geN

orw

ayJa

pan

Den

mar

kPo

land

Icel

and

Esto

nia

Braz

ilIt

aly

Czec

h Re

...Po

rtug

alSp

ain

Swed

enFr

ance

Slov

ak R

e...

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f tea

cher

s

Netherlands:Teachers’ Programme

2013-20 (2013) Australia: Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (2010)

Finland: OSAAVA programme

(2010-16)

Korea: Evaluation system

(2010)

Mexico: Teacher Professional

Service (2013)

France: Reform of teacher training

programmes (2013)

Source: OECD (2014), TALIS..

% lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that teaching profession is a valued profession in society, TALIS 2014

Policies to achieve more equitable education systems and reduce dropout

Invest early and through upper secondary

Support low performing

disadvantaged schools

Eliminate system level

obstacles to equity

No single model for success in the implementation of education reforms Reforms are specific to country’s education system context.

Some factors for effective implementation:

Placing the student and learning at the centre;

Invest in capacity-building; Leadership and coherence; Stakeholder engagement; Clear and actionable plans.

Main sources for further information

Education Policy Outlookwww.oecd.org/edu/policyoutlook.htm

www.oecd.org/edu/equity

For further information Beatriz Pont, [email protected] @beatrizpont

www.oecd.org/edu/policyoutlook.htm www.oecd.org/pisa