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. • 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. 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. Amount of money spent by US households on child
development
7
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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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
Gap in literacy performance between adults
with and without tertiary-educated parents
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. 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. 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. 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
Unadjusted differences are the differences between the two means for each contrast
category. Adjusted differences are based on a regression model and take account of differences associated with other factors such as, age, gender, education, immigrant, and language background.
The best way to address educational inequalities is to tackle low performance and prevent early school dropout while providing additional support for disadvantaged schools, which are often amongst the lowest-performing schools in education systems. There are many actions which can be taken in order to realize these policy recommendations for tackling low-performance. Some of these include:
Encouraging Teaching practices that promote equity and increase educational outcomes
Early years intervention (including early screening)
Self-regulatory learning/additional classes and tutoring after school/mentoring/peer learning
Increase instruction/learning time either during or after school (tutoring, homework, extracurricular activities)
Policies that promote equity
Governance
Indicators to track progress
Evaluation component to track effectiveness of equity policies
Reduce grade repetition: Grade repetition, early tacking and ability grouping can perpetuate educational inequalities in schools and these practices are often very costly and ineffective in raising educational outcomes.
Encourage more positive school climate - Positive student-teacher relationships and maintaining a culture of high expectations and support are important since students who feel that their teachers support them and are invested in their academic success are more likely to have fewer disciplinary problems and achieve higher performance. In schools with negative disciplinary climate and authoritative punitive measures, students can enter a vicious cycle in the more they are punished for disruptive behaviour, the more disruptive their behaviour may become. This can prompt feelings of disengagement and non-belonging and could eventually lead to school drop-out.
Engage with families and the community -Engaging parents early on and keeping them involved and informed throughout the school year is important. This is especially true amongst students from disadvantaged or low SES backgrounds since it has been shown that high-achieving students from disadvantaged schools are more likely to be enjoying greater levels of parental involvement in their education at home then their lower-performing peers. There should be clear lines of communication between families, schools and teachers and parents should be encouraged to participate in the academic lives of their children, either at the school through volunteering or serving on a school board and/or at home by talking to their children about their day, or helping them with homework. Unfortunately, increasing the parental involvement of disadvantaged students and schools can be challenging. Parents from low SES are often less involved in their children’s schooling due to both economic and social factors. This could be remedied by having teachers or educational professionals perform home visits as an opportunity to speak with parents and better understand their student’s home life. Family support and education programs, such as language classes, can also be provided by the school in order to engage parents and to emphasise the importance of education in their children’s lives. Finally schools should reach out and create partnerships with community members and organizations since this could offer to students the additional support and tools needed to achieve academic success.