Education Policy Outlook - Making Reforms Happen
âąAls PPTX, PDF herunterladenâą
20 gefĂ€llt mirâą55,925 views
Education Policy Outlook in Brief Looks at education reforms across 34 OECD countries that can touch the lives of more than 150 million students. There are common trends from the more than 450 reforms adopted across countries. With the crisis they are becoming more strategic. Education policy is not only about design. implementation and follow up are vital for success of reforms. The Outlook aims to support policy makers and others to make reform happen that translates into better education in our schools and classrooms
Empfohlen
Weitere Àhnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Ăhnlich wie Education Policy Outlook - Making Reforms Happen
Ăhnlich wie Education Policy Outlook - Making Reforms Happen (20)
Mehr von EduSkills OECD
Mehr von EduSkills OECD (20)
KĂŒrzlich hochgeladen
KĂŒrzlich hochgeladen (20)
Education Policy Outlook - Making Reforms Happen
- 1. 11 Education Policy Outlook Making Reforms Happen January 2014
- 2. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 22 Education Policy Outlook in Brief There are common trends from the more than 450 reforms adopted across countries. With the crisis they are becoming more strategic. Education policy is not only about design. implementation and follow up are vital for success of reforms. The Outlook aims to support policy makers and others to make reform happen that translates into better education in our schools and classrooms. Looks at education reforms across 34 OECD countries that can touch the lives of more than 150 million studentsâŠ
- 3. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 33 It is possible to achieve both equity and quality Chile Hungary Slovak Republic Portugal Luxembourg France New Zealand Belgium Israel Germany TurkeyGreece Spain United Kingdom Czech Republic Denmark Slovenia Ireland Austria Switzerland Poland United States Netherlands EstoniaFinland Japan Sweden Australia Canada Iceland Norway Mexico Korea Italy 350 400 450 500 550 600 051015202530 Meanmathematicsscore Percentage of variation in performance explained by the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status OECD average OECD average Above-average mathematics performance Below-average equity in education outcomes Above-average mathematics performance Above-average equity in education outcomes Below-average mathematics performance Below-average equity in education outcomes Below-average mathematics performance Above-average equity in education outcomes Source: OECD (2013), PISA 2012 Results: Excellence through Equity (Volume II): Giving Every Student the Chance to Succeed, Table II.1.2.
- 4. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 4 We need education policy reforms that improve outcomes International trade More diverse communities The digital society Greater accountability Focus on equity and quality Need to invest in education for better outcomes 4 Global trends shape our education systems âŠ
- 5. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 5 5 âŠat the same time, our education systems today can shape the prosperity of our countries tomorrow⊠Better education can shape economic prosperity⊠Bringing all countries up to the performance of Finland would result in financial gains of USD 260 trillion over the lifetime of those born in 2010. Societies with skilled individuals are better prepared to respond to the current and future potential crises... âą More educated people contribute to more democratic societies and sustainable economies, are less dependent on public aid and less vulnerable to economic downturns. âą Investing in education for all, in particular for children from disadvantaged backgrounds, is both fair and economically efficient.
- 6. Source: OECD, PISA 2012 Database, Figure I.2.23. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 66 Around one in four 15-year-old students does not reach a minimum level of skills, PISA 2012 % 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Mexico Turkey Greece Hungary SlovakRepublic Sweden UnitedStates Portugal Italy Luxembourg Spain NewZealand France Norway OECDaverage⊠Iceland CzechRepublic Australia Belgium Austria Germany Ireland Denmark Netherlands Poland Canada Switzerland Finland Japan Korea % of students below proficiency Level 2 Percentage of students below Level 2 in 2012 Percentage of students below Level 2 in 2003
- 7. Source: OECD (2014), Education at a Glance 2014: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, Table A1.2a. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 77 The share of students not completing upper secondary education remains high 0 20 40 60 80 100 Mexico Turkey Portugal Spain Italy Iceland Chile1 NewZealand Denmark Belgium Norway OECDaverage Greece Netherlands France UnitedKingdom Ireland Luxembourg Estonia Australia Germany Hungary Austria UnitedStates Switzerland Finland Israel Sweden Canada CzechRepublic SlovakRepublic Slovenia Poland Korea % 25-34 55-64
- 8. Source: OECD (2014), Education at a Glance 2014: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, Table B1.5a. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 88 Expenditure in education has continued to increase 80 90 100 110 120 130 Chile SlovakRepublic3 Korea Poland2 CzechRepublic Canada3 Australia Germany Israel Switzerland2 Portugal2 Mexico UnitedKingdom Finland Sweden OECDaverage Netherlands Austria Japan3 Norway1 UnitedStates Ireland2 Belgium Slovenia France Spain Estonia1 Iceland Denmark3 Italy2 Hungary1,2 Index of change (2008=100) Change in expenditure Change in the number of students (in full-time equivalents) Change in expenditure per student Change in expenditure in primary, secondary post-secondary non-tertiary education, 2008-2011
- 9. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 99 But it is how it is spent that counts Source: OECD (2013),PISA 2012 Results: What Makes Schools Successful (Volume IV): Resources, Policies and Practices, Figure IV.1.8. Slovak Republic Czech Republic Estonia Israel Poland Korea Portugal New Zealand Canada Germany Spain France Italy FinlandJapan Slovenia Ireland Iceland Netherlands Sweden Belgium United Kingdom Australia Denmark United States Austria Norway Switzerland Luxembourg Turkey Mexico Chile Hungary RÂČ = 0.00 400 450 500 550 600 0 50 000 100 000 150 000 200 000 MathematicsperformanceonPISA2012 Average spending per student from the age of 6 to 15 (USD, PPPs) Spending per student and average math performance, PISA 2012
- 10. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 10 We need education policy reforms that improve outcomes 1 With the crisis, countriesâ education policies are focusing on what matters⊠Countries see education as a solution to the economic crisis and beyond⊠and are investing in education by⊠Students: Targeting policies to specific disadvantaged groups and making VET and tertiary education more relevant to labour market needs. Institutions: Investing in improving the teaching profession and curriculum as well as developing more system evaluation and student assessments. System: Setting clear policy priorities with concrete objectives or using funding strategically.
- 11. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 1111 There are clear common policy trends across countries Key policies implemented across OECD countries by policy lever, 2008-14 (based on countriesâ self reports) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Equity and quality Preparing students for the future School improvement Evaluation and assessment Governance Funding % Students: Raising Outcomes Institutions: Enhancing quality Systems: Governing effectively
- 12. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 12 Making effective reforms happen is key 1 2 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 VET reforms 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
- 13. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 13 We need education policy reforms that improve outcomes 1 Students: Raising Outcomes 1) Investing in equity and quality (16% of reforms reported): Targeting policies to specific disadvantaged groups (e.g. New Zealand, England, France), and investing early on in ECEC (e.g. Australia, Poland and Korea). 2) Preparing students for the future (29% of reforms reported): Focusing on VET (e.g. Portugal, Denmark and Sweden) & tertiary education (e.g. Belgium, Fl. & Hungary).
- 14. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 1414 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Estonia Iceland Korea Turkey Norway Canada Mexico UnitedKingdom Finland Italy Sweden Japan Netherlands UnitedStates Slovenia Greece Switzerland Ireland Australia OECDaverage Poland Spain CzechRepublic Portugal Austria Denmark Chile Luxembourg Germany Belgium Israel France NewZealand Hungary SlovakRepublic Ratio Increased likelihood of students in the bottom quarter of the ESCS index scoring in the bottom quarter of the mathematics performance distribution Increased likelihood of immigrant students scoring in the bottom quarter of the mathematics performance distribution OECD average Students from disadvantaged or diverse backgrounds face higher risk of low performance Source: OECD, PISA 2012 Database, Table II.2.4a and Table II.3.4a. New Zealand: Policies to support MÄori /Pasifika populations (2008-13) Finland: National Core Curriculum for Instruction Preparing Immigrants for Basic Education (2009) France/Portugal: Education Priority Zones Chile: Law on Preferential Subsidies (2008) Austria: New middle school reform Germany: National Action Plan on Integration (2011) ECEC: Poland, Korea, Australia, Italy, Nordic Countries, Slovenia, United StatesâŠ. UK England: Pupil premium
- 15. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 1515 Prioritising vocational education and training (VET) 0 20 40 60 80 100 Canada Mexico Korea Japan Hungary NewZealand Chile Ireland Greece Iceland Estonia UnitedKingdom Israel Portugal Turkey1 France Spain OECDaverage Denmark Poland Germany Sweden Australia Norway Italy Luxembourg Switzerland Slovenia Netherlands Finland SlovakRepublic CzechRepublic Belgium Austria % General Pre-vocational Vocational Enrolment of upper secondary students in pre-vocational or vocational programmes Denmark: VET with academic exam (2010); Better More attra ctive VET (2014) Portugal: National Integrated Strategy(2012-14) Italy: Governance & Higher Technical Institutes (2011) New Zealand: Trades Academies(2009) Germany: Information & transitions into Tertiary Japan: Guidelines for enhancing provision Luxembourg: VET Reform (2008) Canada: Apprenticeship grants (2007-)
- 16. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 16 We need education policy reforms that improve outcomes 1 Institutions: Enhancing quality 3) Supporting school improvement (24% of reforms reported): Investing heavily in improving the teaching profession (e.g. Finland, France) and revising curricula (Scotland (UK), Japan , Finland) 4) Strengthening evaluation and assessment (12% of reforms reported): Developing more system evaluation (e.g. Italy) & student assessments (e.g. Australia).
- 17. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Korea Finland Mexico Alberta(Canada) Flanders(Belgium) Netherlands Australia England(UK) Israel UnitedStates Chile Average Norway Japan Denmark Poland Iceland Estonia Brazil Italy CzechRepublic Portugal Spain Sweden France SlovakRepublic Percentageofteachers Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 17 Improving the quality and delivery of education in schools 17 Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that teaching profession is a valued profession in society, TALIS 2014 17 Netherlands: Teachersâ Programme 2013-20 (2013) Australia: Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (2010) Finland: OSAAVA programme (2010-16) New Zealand: Teacher standards and Registered Teacher Criteria (2010-13) United States: Teacher Quality Partnership Programme (2012) France: Reform of teacher training programmes (2013) Korea: Evaluation system (2010) Mexico: Teacher Professional Service (2013)
- 18. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 18 Developing learning environments18 Students reports of teacher student relations and classrooms conduciveness to learning, PISA 2012 18 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 Mexico Portugal Canada Iceland UnitedStates Chile Turkey UnitedKingdom Denmark Australia Switzerland NewZealand Sweden Israel Ireland OECDaverage Spain Hungary Luxembourg Estonia Finland Belgium Korea Greece Norway Austria Netherlands Italy CzechRepublic Japan France SlovakRepublic Germany Slovenia Poland Mean index Index of teacher-student relations Index of disciplinary climate Japan: Course of Study UK: Curriculum for Excellence (Scotland), and National Literacy and Numeracy (Wales, 2013) Slovenia: Updated curricula (2012) Denmark: National Common Objectives (2009) Finland: Curriculum reform (2014) Italy: Curriculum guidelines (2012) Sweden: New curriculum (2011) France: Redistribution of learning time
- 19. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 OECD Greece100 Portugal100 Netherlands99 Poland99 France97 Belgium97 Germany96 Canada100 Spain99 Austria96 Luxembourg95 SlovakRepublic⊠Finland99 Slovenia98 Mexico99 Japan99 Chile100 Italy99 Switzerland94 Estonia99 Israel100 CzechRepublic93 NewZealand100 OECDaverage98 Hungary94 UnitedKingdom⊠Australia100 Ireland100 UnitedStates99 Korea95 Turkey97 Sweden94 Iceland100 Denmark99 Norway98 % To make decisions about studentsâ retention or promotion % To monitor the schoolâs progress from year to year To identify aspects of instruction or the curriculum that could be improved â Source: OECD, PISA 2012 Database, Table IV.5.5. OECD, PISA 2012 Database, Table IV.5.6. Most common uses of student assessments according to school principals (2012) Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 1919 Enhancing evaluation and assessment to improve student outcomes Australia: NAPLAN Student assessment, My School, My Skills and My University Chile: National Quality of Education Agency National Standardised Assessments: Austria; Czech Republic; Denmark; Ireland; Italy, Spain, Sweden, UK (Wales Norway: Assessment for Learning (2010)
- 20. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 20 We need education policy reforms that improve outcomes 2 Systems: Governing effectively 5) Steering policy setting priorities and funding effectively : Setting clear policy priorities (9%) (e.g. Denmark) with concrete objectives or using funding strategically (11%) (e.g. Germany, United States).
- 21. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 2121 Steering education systems towards higher performance Increasingly complex policy-making environments Central Austria Czech Republic France Greece Hungary Israel Italy Luxembourg Portugal Turkey Central with local Chile Denmark Estonia Finland Iceland Japan Korea Norway Poland Slovak Republic Slovenia Sweden Central with schools Ireland Netherlands New Zealand Shared central agreed with regional Mexico Spain Decentralised Australia Canada Belgium Germany Switzerland United Kingdom United States
- 22. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 2222 Steering education systems towards higher performance Increasingly complex policy-making environments Central Austria Czech Republic France Greece Hungary Israel Italy Luxembourg Portugal Turkey Central with local Chile Denmark Estonia Finland Iceland Japan Korea Norway Poland Slovak Republic Slovenia Sweden Central with schools Ireland Netherlands New Zealand Shared central agreed with regional Mexico Spain Decentralised Australia Canada Belgium Germany Switzerland United Kingdom United States Many countries defined general education strategies or priorities Estonia: LLL strategy 2014-2010 Denmark: Denmark that stands together (2011); Folkeskole reform (20 13) Mexico: Pact for Mexico 2012); Constitutional Reform (2012-13) Canada: Learn Canada 2020 (2008)
- 23. Source: OECD (2014), Education at a Glance 2014: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, Table B1.5a. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 2323 Funding education systems: system, institutions and students Change in expenditure in tertiary education 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 Estonia1 SlovakRepublic3 Chile Hungary1,2 Korea CzechRepublic Finland Slovenia Denmark3 Israel Japan3 UnitedKingdom Italy Poland2 OECDaverage Netherlands Switzerland1,2 France Sweden Germany Australia Spain Norway1 Mexico Belgium Portugal2 Austria UnitedStates Ireland2 Iceland Index of change (2008 = 100) Chile: Scholarships and subsidies (2912) Ireland: Bursary Scheme (2012) US: Pell Grant (2008); Tax Credit (2009)⊠Japan: Scholarships Loan Programme (2912)
- 24. Influenced by the education structure, policy agenda and specific challenges Varied political and historical approaches to policy making Evaluation of policies and/or follow-up is limited Varying duration and type, and a degree of overlap 24 Highlighting common characteristics across policies About 450 policies across 6 policy levers 24
- 25. OECD countries have made education reform happen. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 25 Making effective reforms happen 2 5 School improvement Equity and quality Preparing students for the future Evaluation and assessment Governance Funding Next steps: to make them work for all and for good.
- 26. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 2626 Key factors for effective implementation of education policy Placing the student and learning at the centre Capacity-building Leadership and coherence Policy evaluation Reforms are specific to countryâs education system context Stakeholder engagement No single model for success in the implementation of education reforms
- 27. Education Policy Trends âą Policy options across different policy levers Implementation of Reforms âą Key factors to support effective implementation Country Snapshots âą 34 individual country reform stories The Education Policy Outlook reviews trends and implementation to help make the policy choices #OECDEPO @oecd.org www.oecd.com/edu/policyoutlook.htm 27
- 28. Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 28 Searching for policies adopted across OECD countries 28 Education Policy Outlook Reforms Finder contains policies analysed in report from 2008 to 2014: http://www.oecd.org/edu/reformsfinder.htm
- 29. Find out more about the Education Policy Outlook Series at www.oecd.com/edu/policyoutlook.htm #OECDEPO 2
- 30. Photo and illustration credits Cover slide © SashaChebotarev/Shutterstock Slide 6 ©Tatiana Popova/Shutterstock Slide 4 © Sergey Nivens/Shutterstock © Cienpies Design/Shutterstock © Andrey_Kuzmin/Shutterstock
Hinweis der Redaktion
- Achieving equity and quality in an education system is possible. Korea, Japan, the Netherlands, Finland, Canada, Estonia and Australia combine high performance and high levels of equity, as shown in the upper right quadrant of Figure 1.1. These systems manage to mitigate the impact of studentsâ background on mathematics performance (the percentage of variation in performance explained by the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status [ESCS]) while delivering high-quality results. Education systems that are equitable can not only redress the effect of broader social and economic inequalities, but also allow all individuals to take full advantage of education and training irrespective of their background (OECD, 2013c). At the same time, progress is possible for countries with different performance levels. Countries with lower initial levels of skills, such as Mexico, Chile, Turkey and Portugal, have improved in at least two subjects assessed in PISA (Table 1.1). Other countries with near-average or higher levels of skills, including Germany, Italy, Japan and Poland, have also made important progress in at least two domains. In some countries, both equity and performance in education have improved or remained stable. Between 2003 and 2013, Germany, Turkey and Mexico improved both their mathematics performance and equity levels, while Norway, Switzerland and the United States improved their equity levels without change in performance.
- Total volume of world trade increased tenfold: USD 334 billion in 1970 ï USD 3 910 billion in 2010 Social networking and changing interactions: 552 million people use Facebook every day Migrants represent 11.5% of the population in the OECD
- Total volume of world trade increased tenfold: USD 334 billion in 1970 ï USD 3 910 billion in 2010 Social networking and changing interactions: 552 million people use Facebook every day Migrants represent 11.5% of the population in the OECD
- Delivering equity and quality to foster education improvement is a challenge across many OECD countries. Education systems need to be fair, and ensure that youth reach a minimum level of achievement. Around 23% of 15-year-olds across OECD (almost one in four) performed below Level 2 in mathematics on PISA 2012 and around 20% of 15-year-olds (one in five) performed below Level 2 in reading. Level 2 is considered the baseline level of reading or math proficiency at which students begin to demonstrate the skills that will enable them to participate effectively and productively in life. Those lacking these basic skills at age 15 may drop out, or may not finish upper secondary education and enter the workforce unprepared, requiring additional support and struggling more than their peers.
- Across OECD countries, 82% of 25-34 year-olds have attained at least upper secondary education compared to 64% of older adults. Green: at least 90% of 25-34 year-olds with at least upper secondary education. Red: 20% or more of 25-34 year-olds without upper secondary education. Those with at least upper secondary and tertiary education are more likely to be employed than those without these levels of education, and they earn more.
- Spending: High-income countries and economies (defined here as those with a per capita GDP above USD 20 000) have more resources to spend on education: high-income countries and economies cumulatively spend, on average, USD 89 702 on each student from age 6 to 15, while countries that are not considered to be in that group spend, on average, USD 25 286. Performance: High-income countries and economies have an average mathematics performance almost 70 score points higher than that of countries whose per capita GDP is below the USD 20 000 threshold. Relationship between the two: While among countries and economies whose cumulative expenditure per student is below USD 50 000, higher expenditure on education is predictive of higher PISA mathematics scores. Among those countries and economies whose cumulative expenditure per student is more than USD 50 000, the relationship between spending per student and performance is no longer apparent, even after accounting for differences in purchasing power. For example, the United States and the Slovak Republic score at 481 points in mathematics, but the United Statesâ cumulative expenditure per student is more than double that of the Slovak Republic.
- Total volume of world trade increased tenfold: USD 334 billion in 1970 ï USD 3 910 billion in 2010 Social networking and changing interactions: 552 million people use Facebook every day Migrants represent 11.5% of the population in the OECD
- The recovery from the financial crisis has been slow and national governments are working hard to tackle unemployment, address inequality and promote competitiveness. Increasingly they are turning to education in seeking to restore long-term and inclusive economic growth.
- Investing in equity and quality, with 16% of reforms: Countries especially focus on disadvantaged students and on ECEC. Examples of policies to enhance equity include New Zealandâs range of policies to support Maori and Pasifika Island populations, Englandâs pupil premium or Franceâs priority education programmes. Australia and Poland introduced reforms aimed for universal coverage in ECEC and Korea introduced the âNuri Curriculumâ to improve wellbeing. 2) Preparing students for the future has been a priority, with 29% of reforms in this area: Countries most focused on Vocational Education and Training (VET) and tertiary education. Portugal adopted a national VET strategy, and Denmark and Sweden have reformed their VET systems and there were many new curricula all aiming to strengthen links to the labour market. Flanders (Belgium) and Hungary introduced new short-degree cycles.
- Context: Between 2007 and 2010, the average relative income poverty in OECD countries (i.e. the share of people living with less than half the median income of their country annually) rose from 12.8% to 13.4% among children (0-18) (OECD, 2014b). On average in OECD countries, students from low socio-economic backgrounds tend to have a greater probability of being low performers in mathematics (2.15), as do students from immigrant backgrounds (1.71) (Figure 2.3). Across OECD countries, studentsâ background accounts for 14.8% of the variance in mathematics performance of 15-year-olds, according to the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status, with variations that range from 7.4% in Norway to 24.6% in the Slovak Republic (2012) (Chapter 1, Figure 1.3). Many education systems also struggle to provide quality education to groups that are difficult to reach (e.g. Roma, Travellers, Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islander People, and Indigenous communities).
- VET plays a central role in raising student outcomes: Improve the overall quality and equity of education systems Support raising employability among youth and the low skilled At least 70% of upper secondary students in Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland and the Slovak Republic are enrolled in pre-vocational or vocational programmes, while in Greece, Japan, Korea, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, it is less than 30% (Figure 3.2). In most countries, more tertiary students enter tertiary type-A programmes (theory-based programmes) although in Belgium, Chile, Korea, and New Zealand, entry rates for tertiary-type B programmes (technical programmes) are more than 35% compared to the OECD average of 18% (OECD, 2014a).
- 3) Supporting school improvement (investing in teachers, teaching and learning), with around 24% reforms: countries focused strongly on teachers and curriculum. Finland introduced systematic professional development for school staff, including leaders (OSAAVA). France reformed teacher-training with new schools combining practical and theoretical training. The Curriculum for Excellence in Scotland (United Kingdom), revised curriculums in Japan and Finland are examples. 4) Strengthening evaluation and assessment (standards, measuring and accountability for improvement 12%), with more focus on system evaluation and on student assessments. For example, Italy introduced a school self-evaluation and external evaluation tool (VALES). Student assessment policies have included national standards and standardised assessments at different grade levels. Australia launched the National Assessment Program â Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) with yearly student assessments at different levels.
- Figure 7.3
- Figure 7.3
- The use of evaluation and assessment is increasing across OECD countries. Evaluation and assessment tools seek to achieve three objectives: 1) measure student progress; 2) evaluate performance of the key factors that improve student outcomes; and 3) provide evidence-based feedback on how to move forward. According to PISA, student assessments have increasingly been used across OECD countries between 2003 and 2012 to monitor schoolsâ progress, as well as to identify aspects of the curriculum to be improved. Across the OECD, a majority of 15-year-old students are in schools where the principal reported that assessment results are used to inform parents on their childâs progress, to monitor schoolsâ progress and to identify areas of the curriculum to improve, although this varies by country. In using data to guide improvement, countries face two challenges: balancing accountability and improvement, and ensuring the capacity of education stakeholders to develop and use evaluation.
- Countries are setting clear policy priorities with concrete objectives (8.5% of reforms) or using funding strategically (10.7% of reforms). The Danish Folkeskole (public school) reform aimed to raise standards and modify learning time. Funding reforms have also been widespread, either with system-level funding strategies such as the German Investing in the Future Act or the United States Race to the Top, or targeted institution or individual level funding.
- Education policy-making environments have become increasingly complex, due to increased decentralisation and institutional autonomy, greater accountability, and reduced public budgets. Furthermore, educational contexts and institutional and policy approaches vary depending on each countryâs historical development and political and institutional frameworks, as do distribution and approaches to education funding. Steering education systems is a significant challenge for education policy makers.
- For example, the Danish Folkeskole reform was designed to raise standards for public schools, simplify the Danish Common Objectives, modify the distribution of learning opportunities and open up schools to their communities. Japanâs Basic Plan for the Promotion of Education set the priorities and course of action for the Ministry. At the local level, some countries have reorganised school networks or local governance arrangements, as in Estonia.
- Overall, the analysis of equity policy options highlights a variety of characteristics. Some caveats to the database that will be object of further refinement in future editions of the Outlook: A qualitative exercise, based on country responses and OECD categorisation. An imbalance in terms of country policies: Education Policy Outlook Country Profiles and shorter country snapshots for countries May not cover policy areas that have not been a recent focus of OECD analysis (such as ICT in education, special needs education, or adult learning). In future editions of the Education Policy Outlook, the process for gathering, classifying and including policies and data will be refined and enriched.
- The recovery from the financial crisis has been slow and national governments are working hard to tackle unemployment, address inequality and promote competitiveness. Increasingly they are turning to education in seeking to restore long-term and inclusive economic growth.
- The analysis of the different policy issues in this chapter indicate key factors for effective implementation include: 1) putting the student and learning at the centre; 2) capacity-building; 3) leadership and coherence; 4) stakeholder engagement; and 5) policy evaluation. These factors are explored in the introduction and in the sections on reforms in evaluation and assessment and in innovative learning environments. The analysis is enriched with country examples. Engagement of stakeholders is further developed in the final two sections of the chapter based on surveys implemented by both the OECD Teacher Union Advisory Committee (TUAC) and the OECD Business and Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC). Research shows there is no single model for success in implementation of education reforms. Factors such as the history of the countryâs education system, institutional and political settings, existing policies, teachersâ beliefs and competences will influence how policies are interpreted and implemented in the local context.
- Image must be replaced with shutterstock
- Slide 41: Hourglass - http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/images/business-CM079001906.aspx?qu=hourglass&ex=1#ai:MC900278554| Slide 44: Pencil - http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/images/business-CM079001906.aspx?qu=pencil&ex=1#ai:MP900405402| Slide 49 and 51: Microsoft Clipart Slide 61: shutterstock 125451908