The role of education in human capital formation
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
2 gefällt mir•5,521 views
Presentation by Michael Ward (OECD Development Cooperation Directorate) during the OECD-UNDP G20 Workshop in 2018
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Ähnlich wie The role of education in human capital formation
Ähnlich wie The role of education in human capital formation (20)
Mehr von OECD Development Centre, Paris
Mehr von OECD Development Centre, Paris (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
The role of education in human capital formation
- 1. The role of education in human capital formation Human capital defined • Human capital consists of the knowledge, skills, and health that people accumulate throughout their lives, enabling them to realize their potential as productive members of society. Education’s role • Education, particularly schooling, serves as the basis for human capital, as it plays a fundamental role in the accumulation of foundational skills, such as literacy and numeracy.
- 2. Education Sustainable Development Goal – SDG 4 The most ambitious global agenda for education ever: all children, young people and adults achieving at least minimum levels of literacy and numeracy by 2030
- 3. PISA 2015: Proportion of 15-year-old students at the end of lower secondary education achieving at least minimum proficiency in mathematics (PISA Level 2 or above) Upper-middle- and high-income countries Lower-middle income countries Proportionof15-year-oldstudentsachievingatleastabaselinelevelof proficiency(Level2inPISA)inmathematics(%) PISA ESCS parity index (Q1%/Q4%)
- 4. The world is seriously off-track in ensuring all children, young people and adults achieve at least minimum levels of literacy and numeracy by 2030 Number of children and adolescents who do not achieve the minimum proficiency level in reading by region, age group and sex
- 5. Gender gaps widen with age
- 6. Human capital formation: building the foundations for success over the life-course of children and young people
- 7. What will it take to be successful? More domestic resources for education • At least 4-6% of GDP proposed by SDG Education 2030 Framework for Action • 15-20% of total public expenditure At least 33 countries do not meet either of these targets More foreign assistance for education – six times above the 2012 levels needed
- 8. Money is necessary but not sufficient Spending per student from the age of 6 to 15 and science performance Figure II.6.2 Luxembourg Switzerland NorwayAustria Singapore United States United Kingdom Malta Sweden Belgium Iceland Denmark Finland Netherlands Canada Japan Slovenia Australia Germany Ireland FranceItaly Portugal New Zealand Korea Spain Poland Israel Estonia Czech Rep. LatviaSlovak Rep. Russia Croatia Lithuania Hungary Costa Rica Chinese Taipei Chile Brazil Turkey Uruguay Bulgaria Mexico Thailand Montenegro Colombia Dominican Republic Peru Georgia 11.7, 411 R² = 0.01 R² = 0.41 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Scienceperformance(scorepoints) Average spending per student from the age of 6 to 15 (in thousands USD, PPP)
- 9. Some learn at high levels
- 10. All learn at high levels
- 11. Defining and measuring equity Equality Equity Inputs Variation in financial and human resources Strength of relationship between resources and the social background of students and schools Outcomes Variation in student and school performance Strength of relationship between student performance and the social background of students and schools
- 12. 200 300 400 500 600 700 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 PISA index of economic, social and cultural status Public schools Private schools Below 1b Level 1b Level 1a Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Lev 6 Brazil: School performance and schools’ socio-economic profile Scorepoints
- 13. 200 300 400 500 600 700 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 PISA index of economic, social and cultural status Public schools Private schools Below 1b Level 1b Level 1a Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Lev 6 Scorepoints Viet Nam: School performance and schools’ socio-economic profile
- 14. 200 300 400 500 600 700 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 PISA index of economic, social and cultural status Public schools Private schools Below 1b Level 1b Level 1a Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Lev 6 Brazil: School performance and schools’ socio-economic profile Scorepoints
- 15. Poverty is not destiny – Learning outcomes by international deciles of the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS) 280 330 380 430 480 530 580 630 DominicanRepublic40 Algeria52 Kosovo10 Qatar3 FYROM13 Tunisia39 Montenegro11 Jordan21 UnitedArabEmirates3 Georgia19 Lebanon27 Indonesia74 Mexico53 Peru50 CostaRica38 Brazil43 Turkey59 Moldova28 Thailand55 Colombia43 Iceland1 TrinidadandTobago14 Romania20 Israel6 Bulgaria13 Greece13 Russia5 Uruguay39 Chile27 Latvia25 Lithuania12 SlovakRepublic8 Italy15 Norway1 Spain31 Hungary16 Croatia10 Denmark3 OECDaverage12 Sweden3 Malta13 UnitedStates11 Macao(China)22 Ireland5 Austria5 Portugal28 Luxembourg14 HongKong(China)26 CzechRepublic9 Poland16 Australia4 UnitedKingdom5 Canada2 France9 Korea6 NewZealand5 Switzerland8 Netherlands4 Slovenia5 Belgium7 Finland2 Estonia5 VietNam76 Germany7 Japan8 ChineseTaipei12 B-S-J-G(China)52 Singapore11 Scorepoints Bottom decile Second decile Middle decile Ninth decile Top decile Figure I.6.7 % of students in the bottom international deciles of ESCS OECD median student
- 16. Variation in performance between and within schools Figure I.6.11 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 Netherlands114 B-S-J-G(China)119 Bulgaria115 Hungary104 TrinidadandTobago98 Belgium112 Slovenia101 Germany110 SlovakRepublic109 Malta154 UnitedArabEmirates110 Austria106 Israel126 Lebanon91 CzechRepublic101 Qatar109 Japan97 Switzerland110 Singapore120 Italy93 ChineseTaipei111 Luxembourg112 Turkey70 Brazil89 Croatia89 Greece94 Chile83 Lithuania92 OECDaverage100 Uruguay84 CABA(Argentina)82 Romania70 VietNam65 Korea101 Australia117 UnitedKingdom111 Peru66 Colombia72 Thailand69 HongKong(China)72 FYROM80 Portugal94 DominicanRepublic59 Indonesia52 Georgia92 Jordan79 NewZealand121 UnitedStates108 Montenegro81 Tunisia47 Sweden117 Mexico57 Albania69 Kosovo57 Macao(China)74 Algeria54 Estonia88 Moldova83 CostaRica55 Russia76 Canada95 Poland92 Denmark91 Latvia75 Ireland88 Spain86 Norway103 Finland103 Iceland93 Between-school variation Within-school variation Total variation as a proportion of the OECD average OECD average 69% OECD average 30% %
- 17. Student-teacher ratios and class size Figure II.6.14 CABA (Argentina) Jordan Viet Nam Poland United States Chile Denmark Hungary B-S-G-J (China) Turkey Georgia Chinese Taipei Mexico Russia Albania Hong Kong (China) Japan Belgium Algeria Colombia Peru Macao (China) Switzerland Malta Dominican Republic Netherlands Singapore Brazil Kosovo Finland Thailand R² = 0.25 5 10 15 20 25 30 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Student-teacherratio Class size in language of instruction High student-teacher ratios and small class sizes Low student-teacher ratios and large class sizes OECD average OECDaverage
- 18. Differences in educational resources between advantaged and disadvantaged schools Figure I.6.14 -3 -2 -2 -1 -1 0 1 1 CABA(Argentina) Mexico Peru Macao(China) UnitedArabEmirates Lebanon Jordan Colombia Brazil Indonesia Turkey Spain DominicanRepublic Georgia Uruguay Thailand B-S-J-G(China) Australia Japan Chile Luxembourg Russia Portugal Malta Italy NewZealand Croatia Ireland Algeria Norway Israel Denmark Sweden UnitedStates Moldova Belgium Slovenia OECDaverage Hungary ChineseTaipei VietNam CzechRepublic Singapore Tunisia Greece TrinidadandTobago Canada Romania Qatar Montenegro Kosovo Netherlands Korea Finland Switzerland Germany HongKong(China) Austria FYROM Poland Albania Bulgaria SlovakRepublic Lithuania Estonia Iceland CostaRica UnitedKingdom Latvia Meanindexdifferencebetweenadvantaged anddisadvantagedschools Index of shortage of educational material Index of shortage of educational staff Disadvantaged schools have more resources than advantaged schools Disadvantaged schools have fewer resources than advantaged schools
- 19. Disadvantaged schools often have more teachers… 24.2 25.8 27.0 27.7 23 24 25 26 27 28 Bottom quarter Second quarter Third quarter Top quarter Students per class Average class size in <9th grade>, by quarter of school socio-economic profile (OECD average)
- 20. …but teachers in disadvantaged schools are less qualified… Figure 3.5 Science teachers without a university major in science, by school socio-economic profile (OECD Average) 31 26 25 21 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 Bottom quarter Second quarter Third quarter Top quarter
Hinweis der Redaktion
- In the case of numeracy, the gap is negative (meaning that boys are more proficient than girls) but very small at age 9/10, grows in magnitude at age 15/16, and grows even more negative at age 26/27. In the case of literacy, the gender gap is positive (meaning that female students perform better than male students) at age 9/10, is even larger at age 15/16, and shrinks to zero at age 26/27. Numeracy and literacy skills have become increasingly important in modern labour markets. The large gender differences that several studies have identified have therefore sparked considerable attention among researchers and policy makers. Little is known about the moment in which such gaps emerge, how they evolve and if their evolution differs across countries.