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
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 students…
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 …
5. Mean mathematics performance, by school location,
after accounting for socio-economic status
Fig II.3.3
5
5
…at 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...
• More educated people contribute to more democratic societies and sustainable
economies, are less dependent on public aid and less vulnerable to economic
downturns.
• 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
R² = 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, countries’ 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 countries’ 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 Māori
/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 States….
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).
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
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 country’s
education system context
Stakeholder
engagement
No single model for success in the implementation of education reforms
27. Education Policy Trends
• Policy options across different
policy levers
Implementation of
Reforms
• Key factors to support
effective implementation
Country Snapshots
• 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
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 students’ 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 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 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 States’ 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 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 Zealand’s range of policies to support Maori and Pasifika Island populations, England’s pupil premium or France’s priority education programmes. Australia and Poland introduced reforms aimed for universal coverage in ECEC and Korea introduced the “Nuri Curriculum” 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, students’ 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 – 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 schools’ 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 child’s progress, to monitor schools’ 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 country’s 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.
Japan’s 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 country’s education system, institutional and political settings, existing policies, teachers’ 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