Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Long-term economic impact of better skills

1,368 views

Published on

Measuring the long-term economic impact of skills and improving outcomes

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Long-term economic impact of better skills

  1. 1. Why quality in education mattersAnd what it takes to improve it<br />Egypt Education SummitLuxor, 18 March 2010<br />Andreas SchleicherEducation Policy Advisor of the OECD Secretary-General<br />
  2. 2. Know why you are looking<br />The yardstick for success is no longer just improvement by national standards…<br />… but the best performing education systems globally<br />Know what you are looking for<br />The kind of ‘human capital’ that makes a difference for individuals and nations<br />How do we recognise it when we found it?<br />The link between skills, and economic and social outcomes<br />Policy implications<br />Understanding what contributes to the success of education systems and improving performance .<br />
  3. 3. A world of change – highereducation<br />Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD)<br />Cost per student<br />Graduate supply<br />Tertiary-type A graduation rate <br />
  4. 4. A world of change – highereducation<br />Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD)<br />United States<br />Cost per student<br />Finland<br />Graduate supply<br />Tertiary-type A graduation rate <br />
  5. 5. A world of change – highereducation<br />Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD)<br />Australia<br />Finland<br />United Kingdom<br />Tertiary-type A graduation rate <br />
  6. 6. A world of change – highereducation<br />Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD)<br />Tertiary-type A graduation rate <br />
  7. 7. A world of change – highereducation<br />Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD)<br />Tertiary-type A graduation rate <br />
  8. 8. A world of change – highereducation<br />Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD)<br />Tertiary-type A graduation rate <br />
  9. 9. A world of change – highereducation<br />Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD)<br />Tertiary-type A graduation rate <br />
  10. 10. A world of change – highereducation<br />Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD)<br />Tertiary-type A graduation rate <br />
  11. 11. A world of change – highereducation<br />Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD)<br />United States<br />Australia<br />Finland<br />Tertiary-type A graduation rate <br />
  12. 12. Know what you are looking for<br />The kind of human capital that makes a difference for people and nations<br />
  13. 13. Latin America then…<br />Hanushek 2009<br />
  14. 14. Latin America then and now…<br />Hanushek 2009<br />
  15. 15. Latin America then and now…<br />Why quality is the key<br />Hanushek 2009<br />
  16. 16. OECD’s PISA assessment of the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds<br />Coverage of world economy<br />83%<br />77%<br />81%<br />85%<br />86%<br />87%<br />
  17. 17. México (410)<br />High science performance<br />Average performanceof 15-year-olds in science – extrapolate and apply<br />Low science performance<br />
  18. 18. How do we know that we found it?<br />To what extent knowledge and skills matter for the success of individuals and economies<br />
  19. 19. Increased likelihood of postsec. particip. at age 19/21 associated with PISA reading proficiency at age 15 (Canada)after accounting for school engagement, gender, mother tongue, place of residence, parental, education and family income (reference group PISA Level 1)<br />Odds ratioCollege entry<br />School marks at age 15<br />PISA performance at age 15<br />
  20. 20. Modelling the impact<br />Programmes to improve cognitive skills through schools take time to implement and to have their impact on students.<br />Assume that it will take 20 years to implement reform<br />The impact of improved skills will not be realised until the students with greater skills move into the labour force<br />Assume that improved PISA performance will result in improved skill-based of 2.5% of the labour-force each year<br />The economy will respond over time as new technologies are developed and implemented, making use of the new higher skills<br />Estimate the total gains over the lifetime of the generation born this year .<br />
  21. 21. México (410)<br />High science performance<br />Average performanceof 15-year-olds in science – extrapolate and apply<br />Low science performance<br />
  22. 22. Relationship between test performance and economic outcomesAnnual improved GDP from raising performance by 25 PISA points<br />Percent addition to GDP<br />
  23. 23. Increase average performance by 25 PISA points (Total 115 trillion $)<br />bn$<br />
  24. 24. México (410)<br />High science performance<br />Average performanceof 15-year-olds in science – extrapolate and apply<br />Low science performance<br />
  25. 25. Raise everyone to minimum of 400 PISA points<br />bn$<br />
  26. 26. Raise everyone to minimum of 400 PISA points<br />% currrent GDP<br />
  27. 27. Some conclusions<br />The higher economic outcomes that improved student performance entails dwarf the dimensions of economic cycles<br />Even if the estimated impacts of skills were twice as large as the true underlying causal impact on growth, the resulting present value of successful school reform still far exceeds any conceivable costs of improvement. <br />
  28. 28. Implications<br />Understanding what contributes to the success of education systems and improving performance <br />
  29. 29. Money matters - but other things do too<br />Question:<br />If better education results in more money, <br />Does more money result in better education?<br />
  30. 30. Spending choices on secondary schoolsContribution of various factors to upper secondary teacher compensation costsper student as a percentage of GDP per capita (2004)<br />Percentage points<br />
  31. 31. High ambitions and universal standards<br />Rigor, focus and coherence<br />Great systems attract great teachers and provide access to best practice and quality professional development<br />
  32. 32. Challenge and support<br />Strong support<br />Poor performance<br />Improvements idiosyncratic<br />Strong performance<br />Systemic improvement<br />Lowchallenge<br />Highchallenge<br />Poor performance<br />Stagnation<br />Conflict<br />Demoralisation<br />Weak support<br />
  33. 33. International Best Practice<br />The past<br /><ul><li>Principals who are trained, empowered, accountable and provide instructional leadership
  34. 34. Principals who manage ‘a building’, who have little training and preparation and are accountable but not empowered
  35. 35. Attracting, recruiting and providing excellent training for prospective teachers from the top third of the graduate distribution
  36. 36. Attracting and recruiting teachers from the bottom third of the graduate distribution and offering training which does not relate to real classrooms
  37. 37. Incentives, rules and funding encourage a fair distribution of teaching talent
  38. 38. The best teachers are in the most advantaged communities</li></ul>Human capital<br />
  39. 39. International Best Practice<br />The past<br /><ul><li>Expectations of teachers are clear; consistent quality, strong professional ethic and excellent professional development focused on classroom practice
  40. 40. Seniority and tenure matter more than performance; patchy professional development; wide variation in quality
  41. 41. Teachers and the system expect every child to succeed and intervene preventatively to ensure this
  42. 42. Wide achievement gaps, just beginning to narrow but systemic and professional barriers to transformation remain in place</li></ul>Human capital (cont…)<br />
  43. 43. High ambitions<br />Devolved responsibility,the school as the centre of action<br />Accountability and intervention in inverse proportion to success<br />Access to best practice and quality professional development<br />
  44. 44. School autonomy, standards-based examinations and science performanceSchool autonomy in selecting teachers for hire<br />PISA score in science <br />
  45. 45. Public and private schools<br />%<br />Score point difference<br />Public schools perform better<br />Private schools perform better<br />
  46. 46. Pooled international dataset, effects of selected school/system factors on science performance after accounting for all other factors in the model<br />School principal’s positive evaluation of quality of educational materials(gross only)<br />Schools with more competing schools(gross only)<br />Schools with greater autonomy (resources)(gross and net)<br />School activities to promote science learning(gross and net)<br />One additional hour of self-study or homework (gross and net)<br />One additional hour of science learning at school (gross and net)<br />School results posted publicly (gross and net)<br />Academically selective schools (gross and net) but no system-wide effect<br />Schools practicing ability grouping (gross and net)<br />One additional hour of out-of-school lessons (gross and net)<br />20<br />Each additional 10% of public funding(gross only)<br />School principal’s perception that lack of qualified teachers hinders instruction(gross only)<br />Effect after accounting for the socio-economic background of students, schools and countries<br />Measured effect<br />OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies from Tomorrow’s World, Table 6.1a <br />
  47. 47. Strong ambitions<br />Devolvedresponsibility,the school as the centre of action<br />Integrated educational opportunities <br />From prescribed forms of teaching and assessment towards personalised learning<br />Accountability<br />Access to best practice and quality professional development<br />
  48. 48. High science performance<br />Durchschnittliche Schülerleistungen im Bereich Mathematik<br />High average performance<br />Large socio-economic disparities<br />High average performance<br />High social equity<br />Strong socio-economic impact on student performance<br />Socially equitable distribution of learning opportunities<br />Early selection and institutional differentiation<br /> High degree of stratification<br /> Low degree of stratification<br />Low average performance<br />Large socio-economic disparities<br />Low average performance<br />High social equity<br />Low science performance<br />
  49. 49. Getting the order right<br />Phases of development<br />Adequate  Good<br />Poor  Adequate<br />Good  Great<br />Main focus of assessment<br /><ul><li>Tackling underperformance
  50. 50. Transparency .
  51. 51. Spreading best practice
  52. 52. World class performance.
  53. 53. Continuous learning and innovation .</li></ul>Role of government<br /><ul><li>Regulating .
  54. 54. Capacity-building
  55. 55. Prescribing .
  56. 56. Justifying
  57. 57. Enabling
  58. 58. Incentivising .</li></ul>Role of professions<br /><ul><li>Accommodating
  59. 59. Evidence-based
  60. 60. Adopting best . practice
  61. 61. Implementing
  62. 62. Accepting evidence
  63. 63. Adopting minimum standards
  64. 64. Leading
  65. 65. Evidence-driven
  66. 66. Achieving high reliability and innovation .
  67. 67. Principled
  68. 68. Strategic partnership
  69. 69. Negotiated
  70. 70. Pragmatic .
  71. 71. Top-down
  72. 72. Antagonistic .</li></ul>Nature of relationship between government and professions<br /><ul><li>Steady improvement
  73. 73. Growing public satisfaction .
  74. 74. Consistent quality
  75. 75. Public engagement and co-production .
  76. 76. Improvement in outcomes
  77. 77. Reduction of public anxiety.</li></ul>Main outcomes<br />
  78. 78. Paradigm shifts<br />
  79. 79. www.oecd.org; www.pisa.oecd.org<br />All national and international publications<br />The complete micro-level database<br />email: pisa@oecd.org<br />Andreas.Schleicher@OECD.org<br />… and remember:<br /> Without data, you are just another person with an opinion<br />Thank you !<br />

×