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.

Educational opportunity for all keynote goal conference 17 january 2018

851 views

Published on

My keynote presentation at the start of the European GOAL Conference in Brussels, 17 January 2018

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

Educational opportunity for all keynote goal conference 17 january 2018

  1. 1. EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL: OVERCOMING INEQUALITY THROUGHOUT THE LIFE COURSE Dirk Van Damme OECD/EDU
  2. 2. 2
  3. 3. 3 Educational disadvantages are transmitted from one generation to the other
  4. 4. 4 After controlling for age, gender, educational attainment and immigrant status, there still is a 20-point difference in literacy between adults with and without tertiary-educated parents 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 RussianFederation² Cyprus¹ Lithuania NewZealand Estonia Australia Japan Greece Sweden Ireland Norway Korea Turkey Canada Denmark Netherlands Spain Italy OECDaverage SlovakRepublic Austria Finland CzechRepublic NorthernIreland(UK) Flanders(Belgium) England(UK) France Chile Slovenia Poland Israel* Germany UnitedStates Singapore Jakarta(Indonesia) Unadjusted difference Adjusted difference Score-point difference
  5. 5. • The intergenerational transmission of inequality through education – Less well-off families tend to relatively invest less in education – Inequality and poverty lead to harms (malnutrition, brain damage, etc.) which affect educational achievement – Lower quality of education and lower learning outcomes at bottom of distribution in countries with higher inequality – ‘Opportunity hoarding’ by middle class – The education gradient in various other outcomes: education redistributes many other ‘goods’ such as jobs, health, income, … living standards and life satisfaction which in turn determine investments and life choices for the next generation The central role of education in transmitting inequality 5
  6. 6. Educational disadvantage in the life-course Individual’s background (micro level) Gender, Ethnicity, Cognitive and socio-emotional skills, Socio-economic status Learning environments (meso level) Socio-Economic and Cultural Status (income and wealth, education, occupation, social class) Education institutions (public/private institutions, teachers, coaches, principals and supporting staff) Neighbourhood (peers, colleagues, local authorities and community facilities) Socio-economic, cultural and political context (macro level) Political and economic context (economic, labour market and political conditions and technological change) Education policies related to equity (policies supporting equitable provision of quality education for all) Social and cultural context (openness, trust, perceptions, beliefs) 6
  7. 7. Amount of money spent by US households on child development 7
  8. 8. 8
  9. 9. Across OECD countries, disadvantaged students are almost 3 times more likely to not attain the baseline level of proficiency in science 3.8 3.8 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.2 3.2 3.1 2.9 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 France Hungary Luxembourg Bulgaria Belgium CzechRepublic SlovakRepublic Germany Switzerland Spain Austria Portugal Poland OECDaverage Malta Ireland Greece Romania Slovenia Italy Finland Netherlands Sweden Moldova Lithuania Denmark Norway UnitedKingdom Estonia Latvia Iceland Odds ratio Increased likelihood of students in the bottom quarter of ESCS scoring below Level 2 in science, relative to non-disadvantaged students (3 other quarters of ESCS) 9
  10. 10. Percentage of resilient students 48 43 39 38 35 35 35 35 34 31 30 29 29 28 27 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 23 22 21 19 18 18 17 14 13 11 9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Estonia Finland Spain Portugal UnitedKingdom Latvia Slovenia Poland Germany Netherlands Ireland OECDaverage Switzerland Denmark Belgium France Italy Norway Austria CzechRepublic Sweden Croatia Lithuania Malta Luxembourg Hungary Greece SlovakRepublic Iceland Bulgaria Moldova Romania Montenegro % Percentage of resilient students 2015 Resilient students come from the bottom 25% of the ESCS index within their country/economy and perform among the top 25% across all countries/economies, after accounting for socio- 10
  11. 11. Societies with more social inequality, show larger skills gaps by parental education background Average numeracy score by parent educational background (PEB) and inequality 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 0.18 0.23 0.28 0.33 0.38 Numeracyscore Inequality (Gini coefficient) Low PEB Medium PEB High PEB 11
  12. 12. A stronger impact of parental educational status correlates with higher inequality in numeracy skills Australia Austria Flanders (Belgium) Canada Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Ireland Italy Japan Korea Netherlands Norway Poland Slovak Republic Spain Sweden England/N. Ireland (UK) United States 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 Score-pointdifference,byparents'highestlevelof educationalattainment Score-point difference between the top and the bottom 10% in numeracy proficiency Correlation between inequality in numeracy skills and the impact of parents' education Correlation = 0.57 Native born only, controlling for age and gender 12
  13. 13. Participation in adult education and training by skills, education, parents’ education and labour market status 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Participationratesof25-64year-oldsin formaland/ornon-formaleducation Level 4/5 Level 3 Level 2 Level 0/1 Literacy proficiency level: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Tertiary Upper secondary or post- secondary non-tertiary Below upper secondary Educational attainment level: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Employed Unemployed Inactive Labour market status: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Tertiary Upper secondary or post- secondary non-tertiary Below upper secondary Educational attainment level of parents: 13
  14. 14. Skills and skills use foster adult learning Adult participation in formal and/or non-formal education, by frequency of use of reading skills in everyday life (2012 or 2015) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Finland Denmark Sweden Israel Netherlands Estonia NewZealand Norway Slovenia Korea UnitedStates Chile Singapore Spain Canada Australia OECDaverage Ireland Poland EU22average Lithuania CzechRepublic Germany England(UK) Flanders(Belgium) Turkey NorthernIreland(UK) Austria Jakarta(Indonesia) Japan SlovakRepublic Italy Greece France RussianFederation % Participation among adults with the highest frequency of use of reading skills in everyday life Participation among adults with the lowest frequency of use of reading skills in everyday life 14
  15. 15. 15 Gap in literacy performance between adults with and without tertiary-educated parents
  16. 16. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Poland Ireland Hungary CzechRepublic Australia Greece Italy France Spain Sweden UnitedKingdom Luxembourg Belgium Slovenia Netherlands Portugal OECDaverage Canada Turkey Switzerland Denmark Finland NewZealand Austria Iceland Norway UnitedStates Germany SlovakRepublic Estonia High Medium Low Downward mobility Upward mobility Intergenerational mobility in education (2009) Percentage of 25-34 year-old non-students whose educational attainment is higher than their parents’ (upward mobility), lower (downward mobility) or the same (status quo) and status quo by parents' educational level (low, medium, high)
  17. 17. Intergenerational educational mobility (PIAAC) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Czech… Germany Austria UnitedStates Slovak… Italy Norway Denmark England/N.… Spain Average Australia Japan Sweden Estonia Canada Netherlands Poland Ireland France Flanders… Finland Korea Russian… Downward mobility Upward mobility % 17
  18. 18. Intergenerational upward mobility by age group 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 55-64 45-54 35-44 25-34 UpwardMobility Age groups Average France Germany Italy Spain Sweden United States England/N. Ireland (UK) 18
  19. 19. Invest early in early childhood education 1. Removing the barriers to access ECEC 2. Supporting family and community-based interventions Financial costs, availability of quality ECEC facilities Lack of information on ECEC services Parenting guidelines and programmes for families Home visits for troubled families Subsidies to boost family income 19
  20. 20. 1. Identifying low performers early on and provide targeted support 2. Supporting disadvantaged schools  Early identification and support for low performers  Delaying tracking and minimizing grade repetition  Holding high expectations for all students  Allocation of adequate resources to disadvantaged schools  Investing in high-quality human resources such as school leaders and teachers  Creation of networks and greater opportunities for “professional knowledge exchange” Support low performers from disadvantaged backgrounds and disadvantaged schools 20
  21. 21. Provide continuing education opportunities for adults 1. Providing targeted learning support for the most vulnerable groups 2. Focusing on improving basic literacy, numeracy and language acquisition 3. Providing innovative and flexible learning opportunities to overcome access barriers 4. Combining adult education, and practical job training and career guidance to reintegrate unemployed adults into the labour market 21
  22. 22. Thank you ! dirk.vandamme@oecd.org www.oecd.org/edu twitter @VanDammeEDU 22

×