PISA Effective Teacher Policies

Effective Teacher Policies – Insights from PISA
Effective Teacher Policies:
Insights from PISA
Andreas Schleicher
OECD Director for Education and Skills

Singapore
Japan
EstoniaChinese Tapei Finland
Macao (China)
CanadaViet Nam
Hong Kong (China)B-S-J-G (China) KoreaNew ZealandSlovenia
Australia United KingdomGermany
Netherlands
Switzerland
Ireland
Belgium DenmarkPolandPortugal NorwayUnited StatesAustriaFrance
Sweden
Czech Rep.
Spain Latvia Russia
Luxembourg Italy
Hungary LithuaniaCroatia Iceland
IsraelMalta
Slovak Rep.
Greece
Chile
Bulgaria
United Arab EmiratesUruguay
Romania
Moldova Turkey
Trinidad and Tobago ThailandCosta Rica QatarColombia Mexico
MontenegroJordan
Indonesia Brazil
Peru
Lebanon
Tunisia
FYROM
Kosovo
Algeria
Dominican Rep. (332)
350
400
450
500
550
Meanscienceperformance
Higherperfomance
Science performance and equity in PISA (2015)
Some countries
combine excellence
with equity
More equityMore equity

Three teacher-policy questions for PISA
How do the best-performing countries select, develop,
evaluate and compensate teachers?
How does teacher sorting across schools affect the equity of
education systems?
How can countries attract and retain talented men and
women to teaching?
Three questions:

Most findings are descriptive and correlational
Image by Randall Munroe, CC BY-NC
…and are described as such.

Main findings from the report:
Are there qualities unique to
teacher policies in high-performing
countries and schools?

What teacher-related features are common…
… to high performing countries and economies?
… to countries that improved in PISA between 2006 and 2015?
… to schools that, after accounting for the profile of students,
have the best results and most positive school climate in
PISA?

… also among high-performing systems
Levels of school responsibility for selecting teachers vary…
Figure 2.2
0
25
50
75
100
Slovenia
Macao(China)
Estonia
NewZealand
Norway
ngland(UnitedKingdom)
ishcommunity(Belgium)
Switzerland
Netherlands
Finland
Australia
HongKong(China)
Canada
Germany
ChineseTaipei
Singapore
B-S-J-G(China)
Japan
Korea
% of students
Percentage of students in schools where principals or school governing boards
have considerable responsibility for…
Selecting teachers for hire
Firing teachers

…but opportunities for professional learning are pervasive
Finland
R² = 0.17
350
400
450
500
550
20 40 60 80 100
MeanscoreinScience
Percentage of students in schools whose principal reported that
professional development workshops are offered at their school %
High-performing
countries and economies
Figure 2.4

Professional-development policies for teachers share much in
common across high-performing countries:
• a mandatory and extended period of clinical education as part
of initial teacher education;
• bespoke opportunities for in-service teachers’ professional
development, such as workshops that address specific issues
facing the school, are available in (almost) every school;
• teacher-appraisal mechanisms with a strong focus on
teachers’ continuous improvement.
(other aspects of teacher policies vary among the high performers in PISA
Common features of high-performing countries (1)

Over the 2006-2015 period, more teachers and better learning were largely unrelated…
Common features of countries that improved in PISA (1)
Figure 2.10
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4
Changeinmeanperformancein
science(2015-2006)
Change in the overall student-teacher ratio in schools attended by 15-year-olds (2015-2006)
Score-point difference
Students per teacher

Australia
Austria
Chile
Finland
Germany
Hungary
Mexico
Norway
Portugal
Qatar
Romania
Chinese Taipei
Thailand
R² = 0.19
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Changeinmeanperformanceinscience
(2015-2006)
Change in the percentage of 15-year-old students in schools whose principal
or the school governing board has considerable responsibility for selecting
teachers for hire
% dif.
Score-point
difference
…but the countries that improved most rapidly often increased school autonomy for hiring teachers
Common features of countries that improved in PISA (2)
Figure 2.13

R² = 0.21
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20
Meanscoreinmathematics
Score-point difference in mathematics between students
expecting a career in teaching and students expecting a
career in other professions
Teaching is a relatively attractive profession for talented 15-year-olds
Common features of high-performing countries (2)
Figure 1.3
High-performing
countries and economies

On average across 18 countries/economies that administered the teacher questionnaire:
Common features of successful schools
Student achievement is…
…positively related to… …negatively related to…
• Mean experience among teachers • Teacher turnover rate
Student behaviour and school climate are…
…positively related to…
• Mean experience among teachers
• Share of fully certified teachers
• Principal support for teachers (index
of transformational leadership)
(based on multi-level regression models that account for student demographic characteristics and socio-economic status)
Figure 2.14
Figure 2.15

Can teacher sorting compensate
for student disadvantage?

Low math performance
High math performance
Mathematics performance
of the 10% most disadvantaged
American 15-year-olds (~Mexico)
Mathematics performance
of the 10% most privileged
American 15-year-olds (~Japan)
Poverty need not be destiny:
PISA math performance by decile of social background
PISAmathematicsperformance

Comparing like with like –
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

Three questions about teacher sorting
• Do schools with high concentrations of disadvantaged
students have more and better qualified teachers?
• Are differences in teacher resources between
advantaged and disadvantaged schools related to socio-
economic achievement gaps among students?
• Are teacher resource gaps larger or smaller in de-
centralised systems of teacher allocation ?

Disadvantaged schools often have more teachers…
Figure 3.1
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)

…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

… and less experienced
Figure 3.7
15.6
16.7
16.6 16.7
14.0
14.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
17.0
Years of experience
Average teacher experience, by quarter of school socio-economic profile
(Average-18)

…and principals report more often a lack of teachers
Figure 3.3
35.1
31.1 29.9
21.4
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
%
Principals' views on lack of teaching staff, by quarter of school socio-economic profile
(OECD Average)

Teacher quantity: class size
… smaller in the most
disadvantaged schools
…larger in the most
Belgium
Canada
Czech Republic
Estonia France
Germany
Hungary
Iceland Israel Japan Korea Latvia
Luxembourg MexicoNetherlands
Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep.
Slovenia Sweden Colombia Croatia
Georgia Indonesia Kosovo Lithuania
Macao (China)
Countries/economies where language-of-instruction classes are…
Romania
Moldova
Montenegro
Peru
Russia
Chinese Taipei Thailand
Trinidad and Tobago
Qatar*Singapore*
United Arab Emirates*
*: no difference is observed among public and
government-dependent schools in the sample
Figure 1.2

Teacher quantity: class size
… smaller in the most
…larger in the most
Countries/economies where language-of-instruction classes are…
*: no difference is observed among public and
government-dependent schools in the sample
Figure 1.2

Teacher quality: science teachers with a science major
… higher in the most
…lower in the most
United States*
Countries/economies where the proportion of science teachers
with a major in science is…
AustriaAustraliaCzech Rep.
IcelandLuxembourgMexico
NetherlandsNorwaySlovenia
SwitzerlandUnited Kingdom
BrazilB-S-J-G (China)Bulgaria
CABA (Argentina)Costa Rica
FYROMIndonesiaMacao (China)
Kosovo
MaltaQatarRussiaSingapore*
*: difference is driven by private, indepedent schools
Figure 1.2

Teacher quality: science teachers with a science major
… higher in the most
…lower in the most
Countries/economies where the proportion of science teachers
with a major in science is…
Figure 1.2

0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
-10 -5 0 5 10 15
Differenceinreadingperformance
betweenstudentsinthetopquarterand
studentsinthebottomquarterofsocio-
economicstatus
Average difference between advantaged and disadvantaged
schools in the size of language-of-instruction classes
Students per class
What matters most: quantity or quality? (1)
Socio-economic
achievement gaps are
unrelated to differences
in class size between
advantaged and
Figure 3.12

R² = 0.13
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Differenceinscienceperformance
betweenstudentsinthetopquarterand
studentsinthebottomquarterofsocio-
economicstatus
Average difference between advantaged and disadvantaged
schools in the proportion of science teachers with a major in
science
% dif.
What matters most: quantity or quality? (1)
Socio-economic
achievement gaps are
larger in countries
where teacher
qualifications and
experience are
inequitably distributed
between advantaged
and disadvantaged
schools
Figure 3.13

United Arab Emirates
Australia
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Czech Republic
Germany
Dominican Republic
Spain
Hong Kong (China)
ItalyKorea
Macao (China)
Peru
Portugal
B-S-J-G (China)
Chinese Taipei
United States
R² = 0.39
0
20
40
60
80
100
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10
Percentageofstudentsinschoolswhose
principalortheschoolgoverningboardhas
considerableresponsibilityfordetermining
teachers'salaryincreases
Difference betwen advantaged and disadvantaged schools in the proportion
of non-science teachers who reported that the school's capacity to provide
instruction is hindered by a lack of teaching staff at least to some extent
%
% dif.
Does school autonomy relate to inequity?
• Not necessarily :
Where school
responsibility for
hiring/firing teachers
and setting salaries
is greater,
inequitable teacher
sorting appears
LESS frequent!
Figure 3.16

3
1
31 Square school choice with equity
Financial
incentives
for schools
Assistance for
disadvantaged
parents
Manage/
consolidate
school
network
Formula-
based
approaches
to school
financing
Admission
policies,
controlled
choice
Foster
collaboration
/pairing
among
schools
Engaging
parents and
stakeholders
What can policy do?

Who wants a career in teaching?

Do students know? 11% of students do not respond to this question -compared to
only 3% for “number of televisions at home”, 9% for “attending a science club”
(closed-response questions)
How do we know about students career expectations?

4.2% of all students expect to work as teachers
Figure 4.3
2.7
5.8
4.5
3.1
3.7
4.3 4.2
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Percentage of students expecting to work as teachers (OECD
average), by ...
...gender
...Immigrant
background
...parental
education
%
0 20 40 60 80 100
OECD average
%
In 2015, 50% of students across OECD
countries on average expected to work
as professionals (including as teachers)
by age 30
4.2 % of all students expected to work
as teachers

compared to other students who expect professional
occupations (OECD average)
…but are often relatively lower achieving
Figure 4.4
...teachers
...teachers
...other professionals
...other professionals
490 495 500 505 510 515 520 525 530 535 540
Mathematics
Reading
Mean score among students who expect to become...
score points

215 235 255 275 295 315 335 355 375
Spain
Poland
Estonia
United States
Canada
Ireland
Korea
England (UK)
England/N. Ireland (UK)
Denmark
Northern Ireland (UK)
France
Australia
Sweden
Czech Republic
Austria
Netherlands
Norway
Germany
Flanders (Belgium)
Finland
Japan
Numeracy score
36 Teachers’ skills
Numeracy test scores of tertiary graduates and teachers
Numeracy score
Numeracy skills of
middle half of
college graduates

215 235 255 275 295 315 335 355 375
Spain
Poland
Estonia
United States
Canada
Ireland
Korea
England (UK)
England/N. Ireland (UK)
Denmark
Northern Ireland (UK)
France
Australia
Sweden
Czech Republic
Austria
Netherlands
Norway
Germany
Flanders (Belgium)
Finland
Japan
Numeracy score
37 Teachers’ skills
Numeracy test scores of tertiary graduates and teachers
Numeracy score
Numeracy skills of
teachers

3-level regression analyses, based on 34 countries that have PISA and TALIS data and system-level salary data:
Overall share of would-be-teachers is
• positively related to teachers’ salaries
• Weakly related to the share of teachers who agree that the teaching profession
is valued in society
Share of boys, among would-be-teachers is
• Positively related to teachers’ salaries
Performance of would-be-teachers (relative to the country mean) is
• Not related to teachers’ salaries
Bottom line: increases in teachers’ salaries might not be enough to attract more
high-achieving students. Targeted measures & promoting (and improving) the
intrinsic factors that motivate teachers perhaps as important.
Is the talent pool for teaching shaped by teacher salaries?

Conclusion
What do these results imply for
policy and practice?

Improving the effectiveness, efficiency and equity of
schooling depends, in large measure, on ensuring that
competent people want to work as teachers, that their
teaching is of high quality and that the high-quality teaching
is provided to all students, and in particular to the most
disadvantaged among students.

Policy implications
• High-performing systems don’t just enjoy a natural privilege due
solely to a traditional respect for teachers; they have also built a
high-quality teaching force as a result of deliberate policy choices
• Greater independence of schools need not lead to greater disparities
in student performance and greater inequities in teacher allocation
• Countries need to keep a close eye on how teacher qualifications,
experience and effectiveness match the needs of schools
• Many countries need to do more to address the needs of all
teachers, particularly novice teachers, in disadvantaged schools

Find out more about our work at www.oecd.org/pisa
– All publications
– The complete micro-level database
Email: Andreas.Schleicher@OECD.org
Twitter: SchleicherOECD
Wechat: AndreasSchleicher
Thank you

PISA Effective Teacher Policies

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to PISA Effective Teacher Policies

Similar to PISA Effective Teacher Policies (20)

More from EduSkills OECD

More from EduSkills OECD (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

PISA Effective Teacher Policies