Learning for collaboration, trust and intercultural understanding
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Like this? Share it with your network


Learning for collaboration, trust and intercultural understanding






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • You can see a similar relationship between skills and social outcomes. If you lack foundation skills, you are more likely to be in poor health, you are less likely to volunteer, you will have less of an understanding of political issues facing your country.You are also less likely to trust institution and people and constantly think that others are taking advantage of you. You may ask why trust is so important but the bottom line is that there is no functioning democracy without trust in institutions and there is no functioning business relationship without trust in your partners and the rule of law. Afghanistan is an example for what financial capital can achieve in a country without a human capital base. You will also be less likely to reciprocate.Finally, those with poor skills show also low levels of political efficacy, that is, they tend to believe that politicians do what they want and that they themselves have no influence.

Learning for collaboration, trust and intercultural understanding Presentation Transcript

  • 1. LEARNING FOR COLLABORATION,TRUST AND INTERCULTURALUNDERSTANDING Dirk Van DammeHead of the Innovation and Measuring Progress division – OECD/EDU
  • 2. Introduction• We know a lot about the impact of human capital (education, skills) on economic growth• We know something about the impact of education on measures of social capital and social progress• We know actually very little on what exactly explains the impact of education on measures of social capital and social progress• We know very little about the educational approaches and interventions which optimise the impact on social progress 2
  • 3. Outline1. Impact of education on measures of social capital, trust and tolerance2. Disentangling the impact of education: the role of cognitive and non-cognitive skills3. How can education improve fostering skills that matter for collaboration and trust? 3
  • 5. Social capital measures by gender, age, education and income Percentage of people reporting they have someone to count on in95 times of need (2010) – source: Gallup World Survey908580757065 Men Women 15-24 25-34 35-54 55-64 and more 65 Primary Secondary Tertiary 1 2 3 4 5 Axis Title Gender Age Income quintile Education 5
  • 6. Levels of interpersonal trust (Europe) 0-0.2-0.4-0.6-0.8 -1 6
  • 7. Proportion of adults expressing interpersonal trust, by level of educational attainment (2008)Percentage Below upper secondary education Upper secondary education Tertiary education 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 OECD average Denmark Hungary Israel Netherlands Switzerland Ireland1 Estonia Spain Poland Portugal Turkey Norway Greece Finland Italy2 Slovenia Austria1 Slovak Republic France Sweden Belgium Czech Republic United Kingdom1. Year of reference 2006.2. Year of reference 2004.Countries are ranked in descending order of the proportion of adults expressing interpersonal trust among those who have attained upper secondary education.Source: www.oecd.org/edu/eag2010 7
  • 8. 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 % Netherlands New Zealand Norway Denmark Austria Sweden Germany France Slovenia Ireland Below upper secondary education Belgium Switzerland OECD average United Kingdom Finland educational attainment (2008) Czech Republic Slovak Republic Estonia Upper secondary education Hungary Poland Israel Proportion of adults volunteering, by level of Spain Turkey Greece Tertiary education Russian Federation Portugal8
  • 9. Years of schooling and levels of interpersonal trustBorgonovi, 2012 10
  • 10. Years of schooling and levels of tolerance towards migrantsBorgonovi, 2012 11
  • 11. Education effects on trust and tolerance 12
  • 12. Incremental differences in interpersonal trust associated with an increase in the level of educational attainment (2008) From below upper secondary to upper From upper secondary to secondary tertiary Group 1 Slovenia Sweden Estonia Poland France Spain Norway1. Year of reference 2006. Belgium2. Year of reference 2004. Ireland1Countries are grouped by those inwhich the incremental differences Switzerlandin interpersonal trust are higher at Netherlandsa higher level of education (Group Hungary1) and others (Group 2). Countriesare ranked in descending order of Portugalthe incremental differences in Turkeyinterpersonal trust associated witha shift from upper secondary totertiary education attainment. Group 2 Denmark United Kingdom Israel Finland Italy2 Austria1 Czech Republic Greece Slovak Republic 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 % % 13
  • 13. Education and measures of social capital• Levels of interpersonal trust and tolerance are strongly linked to educational attainment• Individual’s education explains 8% of cross-country differences in levels of interpersonal trust• Extra year of schooling accounts for an increase in the level of interpersonal trust of 3 to 4% and an increase in tolerance of even 6%.• But impact is not linear: different models of impact according to levels of education• What are the skills that specifically contribute to interpersonal trust and how can education develop them more effectively? 14
  • 15. Schooling and skills development• Education impacts on measures of social capital by fostering various sets of skills: – Cognitive skills • Basic foundations skills (literacy, numeracy, etc.) • Civic information • Critical thinking – Non-cognitive skills (social, emotional, etc.) • Self-efficacy, self-determination, sense of control • Social communication skills • Resilience, patience, consciousness, will power 16
  • 16. Cognitive skills matter for economic outcomes in life (PIAAC data) Increased likelihood of failure (16-65 year olds)3.5 Increased likelihood (16-65 year olds) In lowest two quintiles of personal income3.0 Unemployed2.52.0 Received social assistance in last year1.5 Did not receive investment1.0 income in last year 0 1 2 3 4 Number of of skills domains with low performance Number skills domains with low performance Number of skills domains with low performance 17
  • 17. Cognitive skills also matter for social outcomes in life (PIAAC data)Odds ratios Has fair to poor health2.6 Does not volunteer for2.4 charity or non-profit organizations2.2 Poor understanding of political issues facing2.0 country1.8 Poor level of general trust1.6 Higher propensity of1.4 believing people try to take of advantage of others1.2 Lower propensity to reciprocate1.0 Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 Poor political efficacyOdds are adjusted for age, gender, and immigration status. 18
  • 18. Cognitive foundation skills are moderately associated with interpersonal trust 540 Finland 530 520PISA reading score 2009 510 Netherlands Belgium Norway 500 Germany Switzerland Sweden Hungary 490 Ireland Denmark Portugal Great Britain Italy Greece 480 Spain Slovak Rep Czech Rep Luxembourg 470 Austria 460 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Interpersonal trust 19
  • 19. Effect of cognitive skills on impact ofeducation on health indicators 20
  • 20. OECD/CERI project on measuring education and skills for social progress Cognitive skills Non-cognitive skills•Mental capacity to acquire •Relatively enduring patterns ofknowledge through thought, thoughts, feelings andexperience, and the senses behaviours that reflect the tendency to respond in certain•Interpret, reflect and ways under certainextrapolate based on the circumstancesknowledge acquired 21
  • 21. Non-cognitive skills matter for crime Non-cognitive skillsLikelihood of being in jail Cognitive skills Level of skills 22
  • 22. OECD/CERI project on measuringeducation and skills for social progress Denmark: DALSC Norway: YiN Switzerland: TREE Canada: YITS, NLSCY Germany: SOEP, MARS UK: BCS70 Belgium: LOSO Korea: KYPS USA: ECLS Mexico: MXFLS Peru: NdM Australia: LSAC, ATP Chile: SIMCE New Zealand: CC Secondary analysis of longitudinal data sets 23 14
  • 23. Preliminary results - Germany 1 Causal effects of skills on health 0.9 0.8 ∆Standard deviation 0.7 0.6 0.5 Alcohol dependency 0.4 Obesity 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Cognitive skills Non-cognitive skills ∆standard deviation in outcomes due to 24Source: ZEW 2012 ∆standard deviation of skills
  • 24. Preliminary results - Germany •Only non-cog skills matter for obesity. Effects of skills on •Non-cognitive skills obesity matters for everybody Obese low cog low non-cog high cog high non-cog cognitive non-cognitive 26Source: ZEW 2012
  • 26. Teaching matters... 1.40TALIS Teachers preference for structuring practices Hungary 1.20 Portugal Italy Belgium 1.00 Spain Slovak Rep 0.80 Austria 0.60 Norway 0.40 Denmark -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Interpersonal trust 28
  • 27. Pedagogies matter... Science score Interest in Science Topics 0.3 0.30.25 0.25 20 0.2 0.2 0.15 0.15 0.1 8 0.10.05 4 1 3 0.05 6 0 -1 -2 -2-0.05 0 0 -2 -1 -1 -0.1 -10 -0.05-0.15 -0.1 -0.15 application hands-on interaction investigation 29
  • 28. Effective pedagogies for trust and tolerance• Early development of non-cognitive skills in early childhood education• Raising foundation skills in school• Continuous focus on relevant non-cognitive skills: resilience, self-control, consciousness, etc.• Situated learning at school and community: – ‘Democracy in action’ on school level – Active engagement with ‘otherness’ and diversity – Real-world communication skills development – Fostering active civic participation• Continuity of learning from school into families, local communities and workplaces 30
  • 29. 21st Century Skills Subject-based skills (know-what and know- how) Behavioural and Skills in thinking social skills and creativity (Self- (Critical thinking, abilityconfidence, energy, persev to makeerance, passion, leadership connections, imagination,, collaboration, communic curiosity,...) ation) 31
  • 30. Thank you !dirk.vandamme@oecd.org www.oecd.org/edu/ceritwitter @VanDammeEDU 32