Center for Global Education at Asia Society, profile picture
Uploaded byCenter for Global Education at Asia Society
PPTX, PDF2,705 views

Benchmarking International Best Practice

The document discusses benchmarking international best practices in education. It notes that countries are now benchmarked against the top performing education systems rather than just improving their own standards. Additionally, it examines changes in tertiary education expenditures, graduation rates, and the increasing value of higher education qualifications in the labor market. Finally, it shows projections of increasing numbers of high school and college graduates in countries like China, India, the EU and US in the coming years.

Embed presentation

Downloaded 288 times
1 1 Benchmarking international best practice Benchmarking international best practice Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Putting the World into World-Class Education Asia Society, Washington, July 10, 2009 Prof. Andreas Schleicher Head, Indicators and Analysis Division OECD Directorate for Education
2 2 Benchmarking international best practice Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 There is nowhere to hide The yardstick for success is no longer improvement by national standards but the best performing education systems
Australia Austria A world of change – college education Czech Republic Denmark Finland Germany Greece Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy Cost per student Japan Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Republic Spain Sweden United Kingdom Graduate supply United States Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Cost per student United States Finland Graduate supply Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) United States (2000) Australia Finland Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Israel 5th in university attainment in the younger generation (but down from 2nd in the Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) older generation) United States Australia Finland Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) United States Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) United States Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) United States Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) United States Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) United States Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate
A world of change – college education r Rising higher education qualifications seem generally not to have led to an “inflation” of the Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) labour-market value of qualifications.  In all but three of the 20 countries with available data, the earnings benefit increased between 1997 United States and 2003, in Germany, Italy and Hungary by between 20% and 40% Tertiary-type A graduation rate
19 19 Moving targets Benchmarking international Future supply of high school graduates 14,000,000 12,000,000 best practice 10,000,000 8,000,000 2003 2010 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 6,000,000 2015 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 China EU India US
20 20 Future supply of high school graduates Benchmarking international 14 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 12 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 10 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 8 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 2003 6 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 2 0 10 4 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 2 0 15 2 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 Future supply of college graduates 0 C hi na EU I ndi a US 5,000,000 best practice 4,500,000 4,000,000 3,500,000 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 3,000,000 2003 2,500,000 2010 2,000,000 2015 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 China EU India US
Putting the World Benchmarking international into World-Class Education best practice 21 21 Washington, July 10, 2009 the church medieval age: The school of Schooling in the
Putting the World Benchmarking international into World-Class Education best practice 22 22 Washington, July 10, 2009 discipline Educating for industrial age: Schooling in the
23 23 Benchmarking international Schooling in the industrial age: best practice Educating for discipline Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 The challenges today: Motivated and self-reliant citizens Risk-taking entrepreneurs, converging and continuously emerging professions tied to globalising contexts and technological advance
24 24 Benchmarking international How the demand for skills has changed Economy-wide measures of routine and non-routine task input (US) Mean task input as percentiles of the 1960 task distribution Routine manual 65 best practice 60 Nonroutine manual 55 Routine cognitive 50 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 45 Nonroutine analytic 40 Nonroutine interactive 1960 1970 1980 1990 2002 The dilemma of schools: The skills that are easiest to teach and test are also the ones that are easiest to (Levy and Murnane) digitise, automate and outsource
25 25 Benchmarking international Deciding what to assess... looking back at what students were best practice expected to have learned …or… looking ahead to how well they can Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 extrapolate from what they have learned and apply their knowledge and skills in novel settings. For the PISA assessment of the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds, OECD governments chose the latter
26 26 Mathematics in PISA Benchmarking international The real world The mathematical World Making the problem amenable to mathematical treatment best practice A model of reality A mathematical Understanding, struct model uring and simplifying the situation Using relevant mathematical A real situation Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 tools to solve the problem Validating the results Real results Mathematical results Interpreting the mathematical results
27 27 OECD‟s PISA assessment of the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds Benchmarking international Coverage of world economy 83% 87% 86% 85% 81% 77% best practice Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009
High science performance 565 Finland 28 28 Average performance of 15-year-olds in Benchmarking international 545 science – extrapolate and apply Hong Kong-China Chinese Taipei Canada Estonia Japan New Zealand Australia 525 Netherlands best practice Liechtenstein Korea Slovenia United Kingdom Germany Czech Republic Switzerland Macao-China Austria Ireland Belgium 505 Hungary Sweden Poland France Denmark Iceland Croatia Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 United States Latvia Slovak Republic, Spain, Lithuania Norway 485 Luxembourg Russian Federation Portugal Italy Greece 465 Israel 445 16 … 18 countries perform below this line 6 Low science performance
29 29 Increased likelihood of postsec. particip. at age 19 associated with reading proficiency at age 15 (Canada) Benchmarking international after accounting for school engagement, gender, mother tongue, place of residence, parental, education and family income (reference group Level 1) 20 best practice 18 16 14 12 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 10 8 6 4 2 0 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
30 30 The cost of inaction Benchmarking international Improved GDP from achieving the goal of being first in the world by 2000 Percent addition to GDP 40 best practice 30 10-year reform 20 20-year reform Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 30-year reform Total U.S. K-12 spending 10 0 89 94 99 04 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Note: *K-12 education expenitures are assumed to be constant at the level attained in 2005. These data show that economic benefits from a 1989 reform that raised the U.S. to the highest levels of test performance would cover the cost of K-12 education by 2015 Source: Eric Hanushek
31 31 r The international achievement gap is imposing on the US economy an invisible yet recurring Benchmarking international economic loss that is greater than the output shortfall in what has been called the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression best practice  If the United States had in recent years closed the gap to better-performing nations such as Finland and Korea, GDP in 2008 could have been $1.3 trillion to $2.3 trillion higher (equivalent to 9 – 16% of GDP) Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009  If the gap between black and Latino student performance and white student performance had been similarly narrowed, GDP in 2008 would have been between$310 billion and $525 billion higher – The magnitude of this impact will rise in the years ahead as demographic shifts result in blacks and Latinos becoming a larger proportion of the population and workforce.
High science performance 565 Finland 37 37 Average performance High average performance Highof 15-year-olds in average performance Benchmarking international Large socio-economic disparities 545 science – extrapolate High social equity and apply Hong Kong-China Chinese Taipei Canada Estonia Japan New Zealand Australia 525 Netherlands best practice Liechtenstein Korea Slovenia United Kingdom Germany Czech Republic Switzerland Macao-China Austria Ireland Belgium Strong socio- 505 Hungary Socially equitable economic impact on Sweden distribution of learning Poland student performance France Denmark opportunities Iceland Croatia Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 United States Latvia Slovak Republic, Spain, Lithuania Norway 485 Luxembourg Russian Federation Portugal Italy Greece 465 Low average performance Israel Low average performance Large socio-economic disparities 445 High social equity 16 6 Low science performance
High science performance 38 38 560 Finland Durchschnittliche High average performance High average performance Benchmarking international Schülerleistungen im Large socio-economic disparities High social equity 540 Bereich Mathematik Hong Kong-China Chinese Taipei Canada New Zealand Estonai Japan Australia Netherlands best practice Liechtenstein Korea Slovenia 520 Germany United Kingdom Czech Republic Switzerland Macao-China Belgium Austria Strong socio- Ireland Socially equitable Hungary economic impact on Sweden distribution of learning 500 student performance Poland Denmark opportunities France Croatia Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 United States Latvia Iceland Slovak Republic Lithuania Spain Norway Luxembourg 480 Russian Federation Portugal Italy Greece 460 Low average performance Low average performance Israel Large socio-economic disparities High social equity 15 440 22 Low science performance 12 2
PISA Briefing of Council OECD Programme for International Student Assessment 14 November 2007 43 43 How to get there international comparisons Some policy levers that emerge from
44 44 Benchmarking international Money matters - but other things do too Science performance 575 Finland 550 best practice Japan New Zealand Australia Korea Germany Netherlands 525 Czech Republic Switzerland United Kingdom Austria Belgium 500 Hungary Ireland Sweden Poland Denmark United States France Slovak Republic Spain Iceland Norway Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 475 Greece Portugal Italy 450 425 Turkey y = 0.0006x + 462 Mexico R² = 0.1904 400 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000 Cumulative expenditure (US$ converted using PPPs)
Putting the World Benchmarking international into World-Class Education best practice 45 45 Washington, July 10, 2009 0 5 10 15 -10 -5 Portugal Spain Percentage points Switzerland Turkey Belgium Korea Luxembourg Germany Greece Salary as % of GDP/capita Japan Australia United Kingdom New Zealand France Netherlands Instruction time Denmark Italy Austria Difference with OECD average Czech Republic Hungary Norway per student as a percentage of GDP per capita (2004) 1/teaching time Iceland Ireland Mexico Finland Spending choices on secondary schools Contribution of various factors to upper secondary teacher compensation costs Sweden United States 1/class size Poland Slovak Republic
46 46 Benchmarking international High ambitions and universal standards Rigor, focus and best practice coherence Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Great systems attract great teachers and provide access to best practice and quality professional development
47 47 Challenge and support Benchmarking international Strong support best practice Poor performance Strong performance Improvements idiosyncratic Systemic improvement Low High Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 challenge challenge Poor performance Conflict Stagnation Demoralisation Weak support
48 Human capital 48 Benchmarking international International Best Practice The past • Principals who are • Principals who manage „a trained, empowered, accountable building‟, who have little training best practice and provide instructional and preparation and are leadership accountable but not empowered • Attracting, recruiting and • Attracting and recruiting teachers providing excellent training for from the bottom third of the Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 prospective teachers from the top graduate distribution and offering third of the graduate distribution training which does not relate to real classrooms • Incentives, rules and funding • The best teachers are in the most encourage a fair distribution of advantaged communities teaching talent
49 Human capital (cont…) 49 Benchmarking international International Best Practice The past • Expectations of teachers are • Seniority and tenure matter more clear; consistent quality, strong than performance; patchy best practice professional ethic and excellent professional development; wide professional development focused variation in quality on classroom practice • Teachers and the system expect • Wide achievement gaps, just every child to succeed and beginning to narrow but systemic Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 intervene preventatively to ensure and professional barriers to this transformation remain in place
51 Perception of teachers of the impact of appraisal and 51 feedback in their school Benchmarking international Teachers who would receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards if they improve the quality of their teaching Teachers who would receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards if they are more innovative in their teaching Teachers whose school principal takes steps to alter the monetary rewards of a persistently underperforming teacher Teachers will be dismissed because of sustained poor performance in teacher's school 80 best practice % 60 40 20 0 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 20 40 60 80 Countries are ranked in descending order of percentage of teachers reporting to receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards for an improvement in the quality of their teaching. Figure Source: OECD. Table 5.9. 5.7
52 52 Benchmarking international High ambitions Devolved responsibility, best practice the school as the centre of action Accountability and intervention in Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 inverse proportion to success Access to best practice and quality professional development
53 School autonomy, standards-based 53 examinations and science performance Benchmarking international School autonomy in selecting teachers for hire 70 PISA score best practice 60 in science 50 41 40 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 30 20 10 Yes 0 No Standards based No external School autonomy Yes examinations in selecting teachers for hire
54 54 Local responsibility and national prescription Benchmarking international Towards system-wide sustainable reform best practice National prescription Schools today Schools Finland today The industrial tomorrow? Every school an Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 model, detailed Building capacity effective school prescription of what schools do Schools leading reform
55 55 Public and private schools Government schools Observed performance difference Government dependent private Benchmarking international Government independent private Difference after accounting for socio-economic background of students and schools % 0 20 40 60 80 -150 100 -100 -50 0 50 100 Score point difference Luxembourg Japan Italy best practice Switzerland Finland Denmark Czech Republic Sweden Hungary Austria Public schools Private schools Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Portugal perform better perform better United States Netherlands Slovak Republic Korea Ireland Spain Canada Mexico New Zealand Germany OECD United Kingdom
Pooled international dataset, effects of selected 56 56 Benchmarking international school/system factors on science performance after accounting for all other factors in the model 100 School principal‟s positive evaluation of quality of 90 Schools with more educational materials competing schools 80 (gross only) (gross only) Schools with greater best practice Score point difference in science 70 autonomy (resources) 60 (gross and net) School activities to 50 promote sciencehour of One additional learning self-study or homework (gross and net) 40 One additional hour of (gross and net) 30 science learning at school School resultsnet) (gross and posted Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Approx. one 20 school year publicly (grossselective Academically and net) 10 schools (gross and net) but no system-wide effect 0 Schools practicing ability One additional hour of out- grouping (gross and net) 10 of-school lessons Each additional 10% of School principal‟s (gross funding public and net) 20 perception that lack of (gross only) Effect after accounting qualified teachers hinders 30 for the socio-economic Measured effect Gross instruction background of Net (gross only) students, schools and countries OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies from Tomorrow‟s World, Table 6.1a
57 57 Benchmarking international Strong ambitions Devolved Integrated best practice educational responsibility, the school as the centre opportunities of action From prescribed Accountability forms of teaching and Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 assessment towards personalised learning Access to best practice and quality professional development
High science performance 58 58 560 Durchschnittliche Finland High average performance High average performance Benchmarking international Schülerleistungen im Large socio-economic disparities High social equity Bereich Mathematik 540 Canada New Zealand Japan Netherlands Australia best practice 520 Korea Germany United Kingdom Czech Republic Belgium Austria Switzerland Ireland Strong socio- Hungary Socially equitable Sweden economic impact on 500 Poland distribution of learning student performance France Denmark opportunities United States Spain Iceland Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Slovak Republic Norway Luxembourg 480 Portugal Greece Italy 460 Early selection and institutional differentiation Low average performance Low average performance High degree of stratification 440 Large socio-economic disparities Low degree of stratification High social equity 6 Low science performance
59 59 Paradigm shifts Benchmarking international The old bureaucratic education system The modern enabling education system Hit & miss Universal high standards Uniformity Embracing diversity best practice Provision Outcomes Bureaucratic – look up Devolved – look outwards Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Talk equity Deliver equity Received wisdom Data and best practice Prescription Informed profession Demarcation Collaboration
Creating a knowledge-rich profession in which schools and 60 60 Benchmarking international teachers have the authority to act, the necessary knowledge to do so wisely, and access to effective support systems The future of education systems is “knowledge rich” best practice Informed Informed professional prescription judgement, the teacher as a “knowledge worker” National Professional Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 prescription judgement Uninformed Uninformed professional prescription, teachers judgement, teachers implement curricula working in isolation The tradition of education systems has been “knowledge poor”
61 61 Benchmarking international  www.oecd.org; www.pisa.oecd.org – All national and international publications – The complete micro-level database best practice  email: pisa@oecd.org  Thank you ! Andreas.Schleicher@OECD.org Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 … and remember: Without data, you are just another person with an opinion
62 62 Do teachers trust in their own effectiveness? Making a significant Successful with students Making progress with Benchmarking international educational difference in their class students Australia Dark green bars Austria represent teachers Belgium (Fl.) Brazil who strongly agree Bulgaria best practice Denmark Estonia Hungary Iceland Light green bars Ireland represent teachers Italy Korea who agree Lithuania Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain Turkey TALIS Average 23% 69% 19% 76% 61% 22% 0 100 0 100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 40 50 60 70 80 90 10 20 30 0
Putting the World Benchmarking international into World-Class Education best practice 63 63 Washington, July 10, 2009 10% 30% 40% 50% 60% 80% 90% 20% 70% 0% 100% Bulgaria Estonia Hungary Slovak Republic Lithuania Source: OECD, TALIS Database. Slovenia Poland 8% Ireland Denmark Norway Austria Administrative tasks TALIS Average Turkey Belgium (Fl.) Keeping order in the classroom Korea Malta Italy 13% Spain Time actually used for teaching and learning Australia Portugal Iceland Malaysia How much time is actually used for learning? Mexico 4.9 Brazil Figure
Putting the World Benchmarking international into World-Class Education best practice 64 64 Washington, July 10, 2009 % 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 100 Australia Austria Belgium (Fl.) Brazil Bulgaria 75th-95th percentile Denmark Estonia Hungary Source: OECD, TALIS Database. Iceland Ireland Italy 50th-75th percentile Korea Lithuania Malaysia Malta Mexico 25th-50th percentile Norway Poland Percentiles of time on spent on task Portugal Slovak Republic Slovenia 5th-25th percentile Spain Turkey 4.10 Some teachers lose much more time than others TALIS Average Figure
65 Professional development 65 Benchmarking international r Countries are investing significantly in teachers‟ professional development but there appear to be real issues about matching demand best practice and supply, cost and benefit. r There is a lack of suitable development activities on offer to satisfy teachers‟ demand Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education and it is notable that those teachers who take part in more days of development are more likely to have to contribute towards the cost themselves
66 66 Benchmarking international Comparison of the level and intensity of Average days of professional development undertaken participation in professional development 40 TALIS Average Mexico 35 Korea best practice Italy 30 Bulgaria Poland Spain 25 Portugal Brazil 20 Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education TALIS Average 15 Hungary Turkey Estonia Iceland 10 Denmark Malaysia Lithuania Austria Norway Australia Slovenia Slovak Republic Belgium (Fl.) Ireland Malta 5 0 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Percentage of teachers undertaking professional development Source: OECD. Table 3.1 Figure 3.2
67 67 Relatively few teachersImpacto?the kinds of professional participate in development which they find has the largest impact on their work Benchmarking international Comparison of teachers participating in professional development activities and teachers reporting moderate or high level impact by types of activity % 100 best practice 90 80 70 60 50 40 Average 30 Austria Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education 20 10 0 Participation Participation Participation Participation Participation Participation Participation Participation Participation Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact Individual and collaborative researchReading professional literature MentoringObservation visits to conferences and Qualification programmes improve teaching and workshops Informal dialogue to CoursesProfessional development network and peer observationother schools Education Figure 3.15
68 68 Benchmarking international Relatively few teachers participate in the kinds of professional development which they find has the largest impact on their work Comparison of teachers participating in professional development activities and teachers reporting moderate or high level impact by types of activity best practice Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Figure 3.15
70 70 Benchmarking international The teachers who paid most also did most professional development Paid no cost Paid some cost Paid all cost Days of development best practice 100 90 80 70 60 50 Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education 40 30 20 10 0 TALIS… Slovak… Portugal Malaysia Spain Brazil Denmark Austria Lithuania Italy Norway Iceland Poland Australia Korea Hungary Slovenia Bulgaria Estonia Malta Turkey Ireland Mexico Belgium (Fl.) Countries are ranked in descending order of percentage of teachers having paid all of the cost of development they took Figure Source: OECD. Table 3.5a 3.10
71 71 It‟s not just about more of the same For what type of professional development Benchmarking international do teachers report a high level of need? % 70 60 best practice 50 40 30 20 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 10 0 Teaching ICT teaching Student Instructional Subject field Student Content and Student Teaching in a Classroom School special skills discipline and practices counselling performance assessment multicultural management management learning needs behaviour standards practices setting and students problems administration Areas are ranked in descending order of the international average where teachers report a high level of need for development. Source: OECD. Table 3.2 Figure 3.6
76 Teacher appraisal and feedback 76 Benchmarking international r Teachers generally respond positively to appraisal and feedback but such practices are not widespread best practice r Connection between school evaluation and teacher appraisal/feedback can be effective in influencing teaching practices Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education r Three-quarters reported that they would receive no recognition for improving the quality of their work or for being more innovative in their teaching
77 77 Does appraisal and feedback make a difference for teaching? Benchmarking international Percentage of teachers reporting that appraisal and feedback led to a moderate or large change in the following: A development or training plan for teachers to improve their teaching Emphasis placed by teachers on improving student test scores in their teaching Teaching of students with special learning needs % Teaching of students in a multicultural setting best practice 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 30 20 10 0 Malaysia Lithuania Portugal Korea Spain Austria Brazil Denmark Poland Italy Norway Australia Slovenia TALIS Average Hungary Malta Mexico Bulgaria Estonia Turkey Ireland Iceland Slovak Republic Belgium (Fl.) Countries are ranked in descending order of the percentage of teachers who have received no appraisal or feedback. Figure Source: OECD. Table 5.1 and 5.3 5.6
78 78 Does appraisal and feedback make a difference for the job? Benchmarking international Opportunities for professional development activities A change in the likelihood of career advancement Public recognition from the principal and/or colleagues 100 Changes in work responsibilites that make the job more attractive % 90 80 best practice 70 60 50 40 30 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 20 10 0 Australia Bulgaria Slovenia Malta Estonia Hungary Iceland Malaysia Korea Portugal Slovak Republic Ireland Lithuania Denmark Spain Austria Poland Brazil Mexico TALIS Average Norway Belgium (Fl.) Italy Turkey Countries are ranked in descending order of changes in teachers' opportunities for professional development activities. Source: OECD. Table 5.5. Figure 5.5
79 Perception of teachers of the impact of appraisal and 79 feedback in their school Benchmarking international Teachers who would receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards if they improve the quality of their teaching Teachers who would receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards if they are more innovative in their teaching Teachers whose school principal takes steps to alter the monetary rewards of a persistently underperforming teacher Teachers will be dismissed because of sustained poor performance in teacher's school 80 best practice % 60 40 20 0 Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education 20 40 60 80 Countries are ranked in descending order of percentage of teachers reporting to receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards for an improvement in the quality of their teaching. Figure Source: OECD. Table 5.9. 5.7
80 80 Some teachers are left alone Benchmarking international Teachers who received no appraisal or feedback and teachers in schools that had no school evaluation in the previous five years 100 90 No appraisal or feedback No school evaluation 80 % best practice 70 60 50 40 30 Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education 20 10 0 Australia Malta Slovenia Hungary Estonia Bulgaria Iceland Portugal Italy Ireland Austria Lithuania Malaysia Spain Brazil Denmark Norway Mexico Poland Slovak Republic Belgium (Fl.) Korea Turkey Countries are ranked in descending order of the percentage of teachers who have received no appraisal or feedback. Source: OECD. Table 5.1 and 5.3 Figure 5.3
81 81 Benchmarking international School principals according to their level of management styles by country 1.5 Score on administrative leadership scale Bulgaria 1.0 Malaysia Turkey best practice Norway Brazil 0.5 Mexico Italy Ireland Hungary 0.0 Austria Portugal Slovak Republic Slovenia Lithuania Malta Poland Belgium (Fl.) Korea Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 -0.5 Spain Australia Iceland -1.0 Estonia -1.5 Denmark -2.0 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Score on instructional leadership scale Countries in green have a high average in principal involvement in decision making, while countries in red principals have lower than average. Figure Source: OECD 6.2
82 82 > ISCED5 (Bachelor Female Full-time Permanent Years of employment Contract teaching Benchmarking international degree) Australia + Austria + - Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy Belgium (Fl.) - + Brazil - best practice Bulgaria - Denmark + + Estonia + Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Korea + - + + + Lithuania Malaysia + - + Malta + Mexico + Norway + + Poland - Portugal + Slovak Republic + + Slovenia + - Spain Turkey + +
83 83 Benchmarking international School Number of providing School days of induction providing professional process mentor for development for new teachers Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy teachers Australia Austria best practice Belgium (Fl.) Brazil Bulgaria + Denmark + Estonia + + Hungary Iceland + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Ireland Italy + Korea + Lithuania + Malaysia + Malta + Mexico + Norway Poland Portugal + Slovak Republic Slovenia + Spain Turkey
84 84 Benchmarking international Index of Index of classroom Index of classroom Index of classroom Index of direct teacher- teaching teaching transmission teaching student practice: practice: beliefs about practice: relations student- enhanced instruction structuring oriented activities Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy Australia + + Austria + + + - + Belgium (Fl.) + + + best practice Brazil + + Bulgaria + + Denmark + + Estonia + + Hungary + + Iceland + + Ireland + + + + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Italy + + + Korea + + + + Lithuania + + + Malaysia + + Malta + Mexico + + + Norway + + + Poland + - + + Portugal + + + + Slovak Republic + + + Slovenia + + + Spain + + + Turkey + + +
Index of Index of 85 85 Benchmarking international constructivi st beliefs exchange and coordination Index of professional about collaboration for teaching instruction Australia + Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy Austria + + Belgium (Fl.) + + Brazil Bulgaria + best practice Denmark + Estonia + + Hungary + + Iceland + + Ireland + Italy + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Korea + + Lithuania + Malaysia + Malta + Mexico Norway + + Poland + + Portugal + + Slovak Republic + Slovenia + Spain + + Turkey +
Important 86 86 Benchmarking international Never received Work in Effective Important schools that teachers receive aspect for aspect for teacher appraisal or did not have an more monetary or teacher appraisal: feedback evaluation non-monetary appraisal: innovative from any within the last rewards in the student test teaching source 5 years school. scores* Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy practices* Australia Austria Belgium (Fl.) best practice Brazil + + + Bulgaria Denmark Estonia - Hungary Iceland + Ireland Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Italy Korea Lithuania Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway Poland Portugal + Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain Turkey
87 87 Important aspect for teacher Appraisal Appraisal impact: opportunities for Appraisal impact: public recognition appraisal: Benchmarking international impact: a change professional from the professional in salary* development principal and/or development activities* your colleagues* undertaken* Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy Australia Austria + Belgium (Fl.) + best practice Brazil Bulgaria Denmark Estonia + Hungary + Iceland Ireland + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Italy + Korea + Lithuania + Malaysia Malta + Mexico Norway + Poland Portugal Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain + Turkey
88 88 Benchmarking international Appraisal impact: changes in teachers' Important aspect for School evaluation work responsibilities school evaluations: Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy published* that make the job student test scores* more attractive* Australia Austria best practice Belgium (Fl.) Brazil + Bulgaria + Denmark Estonia + Hungary Iceland Ireland Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Italy Korea Lithuania Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway Poland Portugal + Slovak Republic Slovenia + Spain Turkey
Index of Index of 89 89 Benchmarking international framing and promoting communicating instructional Index of Index of Index of supervision of accountability the school improvements bureaucratic instruction in role of the goals and and rule-following the school principal curricular professional Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy development development Australia Austria Belgium (Fl.) best practice Brazil Bulgaria Denmark Estonia Hungary Iceland Ireland + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Italy Korea Lithuania + Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway Poland Portugal + Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain Turkey
Index of 90 90 Index of Index of school climate: school climate: Index of a lack Index of school school autonomy in resources: hiring teachers Benchmarking international student teachers‟ of personnel shortage of and delinquency working morale Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy materials determining salaries Australia Austria - + Belgium (Fl.) - best practice Brazil Bulgaria Denmark Estonia Hungary Iceland Ireland Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Italy Korea Lithuania Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Republic - Slovenia Spain Turkey
Index of school Index of school 91 91 autonomy in budgeting Index of school autonomy in autonomy: curriculum School average (formulating Public school Benchmarking international student policy (courses class size and allocating and textbooks offered, course the school Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy content) budget) Australia Austria Belgium (Fl.) Brazil best practice Bulgaria Denmark Estonia Hungary - Iceland Ireland - Italy Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Korea Lithuania Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway + Poland - Portugal - Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain Turkey
Direct Constructivist Structuring 92 92 transmission beliefs about beliefs about teaching teaching practices Student oriented teaching practices teaching Benchmarking international Australia Austria Belgium (Fl.) - Brazil - + Bulgaria + Job satisfaction (dependent on…) best practice Denmark Estonia Hungary + Iceland Ireland Italy Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Korea + Lithuania + + Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway - Poland Portugal + - + Slovak Republic + Slovenia - Spain + + Table Turkey + 4.13
Classroom Teacher- Enhanced Teacher's self- 93 93 Benchmarking international activities disciplinary climate student relations efficacy Australia + + + Austria + + + Belgium (Fl.) + + + Brazil + + + Bulgaria + + + Job satisfaction (dependent on…) best practice Denmark + + + Estonia + + + Hungary + + + Iceland + + + Ireland + + + Italy + + + Korea + + + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Lithuania + + + Malaysia + + + Malta + + + Mexico + + + Norway + + + Poland + + + Portugal + + + Slovak Republic + + + Slovenia + + + Spain + + + Table Turkey + + + 4.13
Putting the World Benchmarking international into World-Class Education best practice 94 94 Washington, July 10, 2009 Thank you !

More Related Content

PDF
10 Insightful Quotes On Designing A Better Customer Experience
byYuan Wang
 
PDF
Learn BEM: CSS Naming Convention
byIn a Rocket
 
PPTX
How to Build a Dynamic Social Media Plan
byPost Planner
 
PDF
SEO: Getting Personal
byKirsty Hulse
 
PDF
Lightning Talk #9: How UX and Data Storytelling Can Shape Policy by Mika Aldaba
byux singapore
 
PDF
Succession “Losers”: What Happens to Executives Passed Over for the CEO Job?
byStanford GSB Corporate Governance Research Initiative
 
PPTX
Lessons from PISA: Strong Preformers and Successful Reformers
byCenter for Global Education at Asia Society
 
PPTX
Education at a Glance 2014 - United States
byEduSkills OECD
 
10 Insightful Quotes On Designing A Better Customer Experience
byYuan Wang
 
Learn BEM: CSS Naming Convention
byIn a Rocket
 
How to Build a Dynamic Social Media Plan
byPost Planner
 
SEO: Getting Personal
byKirsty Hulse
 
Lightning Talk #9: How UX and Data Storytelling Can Shape Policy by Mika Aldaba
byux singapore
 
Succession “Losers”: What Happens to Executives Passed Over for the CEO Job?
byStanford GSB Corporate Governance Research Initiative
 
Lessons from PISA: Strong Preformers and Successful Reformers
byCenter for Global Education at Asia Society
 
Education at a Glance 2014 - United States
byEduSkills OECD
 

Similar to Benchmarking International Best Practice

PPTX
Education at a Glance 2014 - Key Findings
byEduSkills OECD
 
PDF
Global parliamentary-network-oct2014 education-at-a-glance
byOECD - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
 
PPTX
Eag2014 webinar
byEduSkills OECD
 
PPTX
Education at a glance 2014 - OECD
byAlbus D. Hoang
 
PPTX
Global trends in higher education
byOECD
 
PPTX
Key findings from the 2012 edition of Education at a Glance - United States
byEduSkills OECD
 
PPT
Key challenges for the international education sector
byUniversity of Limerick
 
PPT
SIW-1 English.ppt
byssusera56e0b
 
PPTX
Uni 4 higher education in developed countries
byAsima shahzadi
 
PDF
Globally HE statistic_unesco1015_brochure_web_en.pdf
bySamJun4
 
PPTX
2010 e-madrid (spanish presidency) - rev 1.0
byOECD
 
PDF
UK Curriculum: A Comprehensive Guide to Academic Structure and Student Develo...
byamankhan99101
 
PPTX
Education at a Glance 2009: OECD Indicators
byOECD - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
 
PDF
Average Tuition and Educational Attainment in the United States
byMitch Barrick
 
PDF
Future-Ready Learning Through the British Curriculum in Dubai
byfix1tkw685
 
PPTX
2010 e-asean (workshop session 3) - rev 1.1
byOECD
 
PDF
Shaping Future Innovators: The Transformative Impact of Middle School Education
bymoeenali5423
 
PDF
Dubai British School Emirates Hills british curriculum (May 1).pdf
byfix1tkw685
 
PPT
Unit 4 ,HIGHER EDUCATION CODE 8625
byZahid Mehmood
 
PDF
Education System in The USA.pdf
byRiyaShah167844
 
Education at a Glance 2014 - Key Findings
byEduSkills OECD
 
Global parliamentary-network-oct2014 education-at-a-glance
byOECD - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
 
Eag2014 webinar
byEduSkills OECD
 
Education at a glance 2014 - OECD
byAlbus D. Hoang
 
Global trends in higher education
byOECD
 
Key findings from the 2012 edition of Education at a Glance - United States
byEduSkills OECD
 
Key challenges for the international education sector
byUniversity of Limerick
 
SIW-1 English.ppt
byssusera56e0b
 
Uni 4 higher education in developed countries
byAsima shahzadi
 
Globally HE statistic_unesco1015_brochure_web_en.pdf
bySamJun4
 
2010 e-madrid (spanish presidency) - rev 1.0
byOECD
 
UK Curriculum: A Comprehensive Guide to Academic Structure and Student Develo...
byamankhan99101
 
Education at a Glance 2009: OECD Indicators
byOECD - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
 
Average Tuition and Educational Attainment in the United States
byMitch Barrick
 
Future-Ready Learning Through the British Curriculum in Dubai
byfix1tkw685
 
2010 e-asean (workshop session 3) - rev 1.1
byOECD
 
Shaping Future Innovators: The Transformative Impact of Middle School Education
bymoeenali5423
 
Dubai British School Emirates Hills british curriculum (May 1).pdf
byfix1tkw685
 
Unit 4 ,HIGHER EDUCATION CODE 8625
byZahid Mehmood
 
Education System in The USA.pdf
byRiyaShah167844
 

Recently uploaded

PDF
A "Kill Switch" (Emergency Off Switch) for AI?
byScott M. Graffius
 
PDF
6 Insights from the Patron Saint of AI Failure
byScott M. Graffius
 
PPTX
02_Extended Warehouse Management Functions and Features.pptx
byUdayakumar218983
 
PDF
Requestly or Postman: What’s the Right API Tool for Your Team?
byhenrycavill30521
 
PDF
Purple Team - Active Directory and AzureAD v1
byVICTOR MAESTRE RAMIREZ
 
PDF
Louisville User Group: Transforming Technical Debt into Technical Wealth
byLynda Kane
 
PPTX
Software Tools for penetration Testing (1).pptx
byAmosCheruiyot13
 
PDF
Generating Structured Outputs from Unstructured Content Using LLMs
byEnterprise Knowledge
 
PDF
Best Bank Statement Converter Software - A Documentation-Based Meta-Analysis ...
bylewisconrada
 
PPTX
Design Flaws and Known Attacks in Agentic AI - ITI Business Session
byInformation Technology Institute
 
PDF
TrustArc Webinar - Unpacking India’s DPDP Act: What You Should Know
byTrustArc
 
PDF
DataLiva-LivaGRC- Business Software for Governance, Risk, and Compliance
byMustafa Kuğu
 
PPTX
IBM_NEXA_DAC2021 NEXA, a cloud-native platform for collaborative hardware log...
byArun Joseph
 
PPTX
KTU-PEMET413 -MODULE 2-POLYMER MATRIX COMPOSITES - LECTURE 1.pptx
byVINAY B
 
PPT
Waste water treatment plant operation and maintenance
byDuggineniRamakrishna
 
PPTX
Building Real-Time Voice AI — Udaiappa Ramachandran
byUdaiappa Ramachandran
 
PDF
SEO in Charleston SC | Local SEO Strategies to Grow Your Business.pdf
bycustomdigitalsolutio1
 
PDF
Chapter 2 Computer Threat .pdf
byGetnet Tigabie Askale -(GM)
 
PPTX
Oracle SCM Cloud Solutions for Smart Supply Chain Management
byChetu
 
PPTX
DVCON24-IBM ai/ml driven hardware verification
byArun Joseph
 
A "Kill Switch" (Emergency Off Switch) for AI?
byScott M. Graffius
 
6 Insights from the Patron Saint of AI Failure
byScott M. Graffius
 
02_Extended Warehouse Management Functions and Features.pptx
byUdayakumar218983
 
Requestly or Postman: What’s the Right API Tool for Your Team?
byhenrycavill30521
 
Purple Team - Active Directory and AzureAD v1
byVICTOR MAESTRE RAMIREZ
 
Louisville User Group: Transforming Technical Debt into Technical Wealth
byLynda Kane
 
Software Tools for penetration Testing (1).pptx
byAmosCheruiyot13
 
Generating Structured Outputs from Unstructured Content Using LLMs
byEnterprise Knowledge
 
Best Bank Statement Converter Software - A Documentation-Based Meta-Analysis ...
bylewisconrada
 
Design Flaws and Known Attacks in Agentic AI - ITI Business Session
byInformation Technology Institute
 
TrustArc Webinar - Unpacking India’s DPDP Act: What You Should Know
byTrustArc
 
DataLiva-LivaGRC- Business Software for Governance, Risk, and Compliance
byMustafa Kuğu
 
IBM_NEXA_DAC2021 NEXA, a cloud-native platform for collaborative hardware log...
byArun Joseph
 
KTU-PEMET413 -MODULE 2-POLYMER MATRIX COMPOSITES - LECTURE 1.pptx
byVINAY B
 
Waste water treatment plant operation and maintenance
byDuggineniRamakrishna
 
Building Real-Time Voice AI — Udaiappa Ramachandran
byUdaiappa Ramachandran
 
SEO in Charleston SC | Local SEO Strategies to Grow Your Business.pdf
bycustomdigitalsolutio1
 
Chapter 2 Computer Threat .pdf
byGetnet Tigabie Askale -(GM)
 
Oracle SCM Cloud Solutions for Smart Supply Chain Management
byChetu
 
DVCON24-IBM ai/ml driven hardware verification
byArun Joseph
 

Benchmarking International Best Practice

  • 1.
    1 1 Benchmarking international best practice Benchmarking international best practice Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Putting the World into World-Class Education Asia Society, Washington, July 10, 2009 Prof. Andreas Schleicher Head, Indicators and Analysis Division OECD Directorate for Education
  • 2.
    2 2 Benchmarking international best practice Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 There is nowhere to hide The yardstick for success is no longer improvement by national standards but the best performing education systems
  • 3.
    Australia Austria A world of change – college education Czech Republic Denmark Finland Germany Greece Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy Cost per student Japan Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Republic Spain Sweden United Kingdom Graduate supply United States Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 4.
    A world ofchange – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Cost per student United States Finland Graduate supply Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 5.
    A world ofchange – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) United States (2000) Australia Finland Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 6.
    A world ofchange – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 7.
    A world ofchange – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 8.
    A world ofchange – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 9.
    A world ofchange – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 10.
    A world ofchange – college education Israel 5th in university attainment in the younger generation (but down from 2nd in the Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) older generation) United States Australia Finland Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 11.
    A world ofchange – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) United States Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 12.
    A world ofchange – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) United States Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 13.
    A world ofchange – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) United States Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 14.
    A world ofchange – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) United States Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 15.
    A world ofchange – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) United States Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 16.
    A world ofchange – college education Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 17.
    A world ofchange – college education r Rising higher education qualifications seem generally not to have led to an “inflation” of the Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) labour-market value of qualifications.  In all but three of the 20 countries with available data, the earnings benefit increased between 1997 United States and 2003, in Germany, Italy and Hungary by between 20% and 40% Tertiary-type A graduation rate
  • 18.
    19 19 Moving targets Benchmarking international Future supply of high school graduates 14,000,000 12,000,000 best practice 10,000,000 8,000,000 2003 2010 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 6,000,000 2015 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 China EU India US
  • 19.
    20 20 Future supply of high school graduates Benchmarking international 14 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 12 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 10 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 8 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 2003 6 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 2 0 10 4 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 2 0 15 2 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 Future supply of college graduates 0 C hi na EU I ndi a US 5,000,000 best practice 4,500,000 4,000,000 3,500,000 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 3,000,000 2003 2,500,000 2010 2,000,000 2015 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 China EU India US
  • 20.
    Putting the World Benchmarking international into World-Class Education best practice 21 21 Washington, July 10, 2009 the church medieval age: The school of Schooling in the
  • 21.
    Putting the World Benchmarking international into World-Class Education best practice 22 22 Washington, July 10, 2009 discipline Educating for industrial age: Schooling in the
  • 22.
    23 23 Benchmarking international Schooling in the industrial age: best practice Educating for discipline Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 The challenges today: Motivated and self-reliant citizens Risk-taking entrepreneurs, converging and continuously emerging professions tied to globalising contexts and technological advance
  • 23.
    24 24 Benchmarking international How the demand for skills has changed Economy-wide measures of routine and non-routine task input (US) Mean task input as percentiles of the 1960 task distribution Routine manual 65 best practice 60 Nonroutine manual 55 Routine cognitive 50 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 45 Nonroutine analytic 40 Nonroutine interactive 1960 1970 1980 1990 2002 The dilemma of schools: The skills that are easiest to teach and test are also the ones that are easiest to (Levy and Murnane) digitise, automate and outsource
  • 24.
    25 25 Benchmarking international Deciding what to assess... looking back at what students were best practice expected to have learned …or… looking ahead to how well they can Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 extrapolate from what they have learned and apply their knowledge and skills in novel settings. For the PISA assessment of the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds, OECD governments chose the latter
  • 25.
    26 26 Mathematics in PISA Benchmarking international The real world The mathematical World Making the problem amenable to mathematical treatment best practice A model of reality A mathematical Understanding, struct model uring and simplifying the situation Using relevant mathematical A real situation Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 tools to solve the problem Validating the results Real results Mathematical results Interpreting the mathematical results
  • 26.
    27 27 OECD‟s PISA assessment of the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds Benchmarking international Coverage of world economy 83% 87% 86% 85% 81% 77% best practice Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009
  • 27.
    High science performance 565 Finland 28 28 Average performance of 15-year-olds in Benchmarking international 545 science – extrapolate and apply Hong Kong-China Chinese Taipei Canada Estonia Japan New Zealand Australia 525 Netherlands best practice Liechtenstein Korea Slovenia United Kingdom Germany Czech Republic Switzerland Macao-China Austria Ireland Belgium 505 Hungary Sweden Poland France Denmark Iceland Croatia Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 United States Latvia Slovak Republic, Spain, Lithuania Norway 485 Luxembourg Russian Federation Portugal Italy Greece 465 Israel 445 16 … 18 countries perform below this line 6 Low science performance
  • 28.
    29 29 Increased likelihood of postsec. particip. at age 19 associated with reading proficiency at age 15 (Canada) Benchmarking international after accounting for school engagement, gender, mother tongue, place of residence, parental, education and family income (reference group Level 1) 20 best practice 18 16 14 12 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 10 8 6 4 2 0 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
  • 29.
    30 30 The cost of inaction Benchmarking international Improved GDP from achieving the goal of being first in the world by 2000 Percent addition to GDP 40 best practice 30 10-year reform 20 20-year reform Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 30-year reform Total U.S. K-12 spending 10 0 89 94 99 04 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Note: *K-12 education expenitures are assumed to be constant at the level attained in 2005. These data show that economic benefits from a 1989 reform that raised the U.S. to the highest levels of test performance would cover the cost of K-12 education by 2015 Source: Eric Hanushek
  • 30.
    31 31 r The international achievement gap is imposing on the US economy an invisible yet recurring Benchmarking international economic loss that is greater than the output shortfall in what has been called the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression best practice  If the United States had in recent years closed the gap to better-performing nations such as Finland and Korea, GDP in 2008 could have been $1.3 trillion to $2.3 trillion higher (equivalent to 9 – 16% of GDP) Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009  If the gap between black and Latino student performance and white student performance had been similarly narrowed, GDP in 2008 would have been between$310 billion and $525 billion higher – The magnitude of this impact will rise in the years ahead as demographic shifts result in blacks and Latinos becoming a larger proportion of the population and workforce.
  • 31.
    High science performance 565 Finland 37 37 Average performance High average performance Highof 15-year-olds in average performance Benchmarking international Large socio-economic disparities 545 science – extrapolate High social equity and apply Hong Kong-China Chinese Taipei Canada Estonia Japan New Zealand Australia 525 Netherlands best practice Liechtenstein Korea Slovenia United Kingdom Germany Czech Republic Switzerland Macao-China Austria Ireland Belgium Strong socio- 505 Hungary Socially equitable economic impact on Sweden distribution of learning Poland student performance France Denmark opportunities Iceland Croatia Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 United States Latvia Slovak Republic, Spain, Lithuania Norway 485 Luxembourg Russian Federation Portugal Italy Greece 465 Low average performance Israel Low average performance Large socio-economic disparities 445 High social equity 16 6 Low science performance
  • 32.
    High science performance 38 38 560 Finland Durchschnittliche High average performance High average performance Benchmarking international Schülerleistungen im Large socio-economic disparities High social equity 540 Bereich Mathematik Hong Kong-China Chinese Taipei Canada New Zealand Estonai Japan Australia Netherlands best practice Liechtenstein Korea Slovenia 520 Germany United Kingdom Czech Republic Switzerland Macao-China Belgium Austria Strong socio- Ireland Socially equitable Hungary economic impact on Sweden distribution of learning 500 student performance Poland Denmark opportunities France Croatia Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 United States Latvia Iceland Slovak Republic Lithuania Spain Norway Luxembourg 480 Russian Federation Portugal Italy Greece 460 Low average performance Low average performance Israel Large socio-economic disparities High social equity 15 440 22 Low science performance 12 2
  • 33.
    PISA Briefing of Council OECD Programme for International Student Assessment 14 November 2007 43 43 How to get there international comparisons Some policy levers that emerge from
  • 34.
    44 44 Benchmarking international Money matters - but other things do too Science performance 575 Finland 550 best practice Japan New Zealand Australia Korea Germany Netherlands 525 Czech Republic Switzerland United Kingdom Austria Belgium 500 Hungary Ireland Sweden Poland Denmark United States France Slovak Republic Spain Iceland Norway Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 475 Greece Portugal Italy 450 425 Turkey y = 0.0006x + 462 Mexico R² = 0.1904 400 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000 Cumulative expenditure (US$ converted using PPPs)
  • 35.
    Putting the World Benchmarking international into World-Class Education best practice 45 45 Washington, July 10, 2009 0 5 10 15 -10 -5 Portugal Spain Percentage points Switzerland Turkey Belgium Korea Luxembourg Germany Greece Salary as % of GDP/capita Japan Australia United Kingdom New Zealand France Netherlands Instruction time Denmark Italy Austria Difference with OECD average Czech Republic Hungary Norway per student as a percentage of GDP per capita (2004) 1/teaching time Iceland Ireland Mexico Finland Spending choices on secondary schools Contribution of various factors to upper secondary teacher compensation costs Sweden United States 1/class size Poland Slovak Republic
  • 36.
    46 46 Benchmarking international High ambitions and universal standards Rigor, focus and best practice coherence Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Great systems attract great teachers and provide access to best practice and quality professional development
  • 37.
    47 47 Challenge and support Benchmarking international Strong support best practice Poor performance Strong performance Improvements idiosyncratic Systemic improvement Low High Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 challenge challenge Poor performance Conflict Stagnation Demoralisation Weak support
  • 38.
    48 Human capital 48 Benchmarking international International Best Practice The past • Principals who are • Principals who manage „a trained, empowered, accountable building‟, who have little training best practice and provide instructional and preparation and are leadership accountable but not empowered • Attracting, recruiting and • Attracting and recruiting teachers providing excellent training for from the bottom third of the Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 prospective teachers from the top graduate distribution and offering third of the graduate distribution training which does not relate to real classrooms • Incentives, rules and funding • The best teachers are in the most encourage a fair distribution of advantaged communities teaching talent
  • 39.
    49 Human capital (cont…) 49 Benchmarking international International Best Practice The past • Expectations of teachers are • Seniority and tenure matter more clear; consistent quality, strong than performance; patchy best practice professional ethic and excellent professional development; wide professional development focused variation in quality on classroom practice • Teachers and the system expect • Wide achievement gaps, just every child to succeed and beginning to narrow but systemic Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 intervene preventatively to ensure and professional barriers to this transformation remain in place
  • 40.
    51 Perception of teachers of the impact of appraisal and 51 feedback in their school Benchmarking international Teachers who would receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards if they improve the quality of their teaching Teachers who would receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards if they are more innovative in their teaching Teachers whose school principal takes steps to alter the monetary rewards of a persistently underperforming teacher Teachers will be dismissed because of sustained poor performance in teacher's school 80 best practice % 60 40 20 0 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 20 40 60 80 Countries are ranked in descending order of percentage of teachers reporting to receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards for an improvement in the quality of their teaching. Figure Source: OECD. Table 5.9. 5.7
  • 41.
    52 52 Benchmarking international High ambitions Devolved responsibility, best practice the school as the centre of action Accountability and intervention in Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 inverse proportion to success Access to best practice and quality professional development
  • 42.
    53 School autonomy, standards-based 53 examinations and science performance Benchmarking international School autonomy in selecting teachers for hire 70 PISA score best practice 60 in science 50 41 40 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 30 20 10 Yes 0 No Standards based No external School autonomy Yes examinations in selecting teachers for hire
  • 43.
    54 54 Local responsibility and national prescription Benchmarking international Towards system-wide sustainable reform best practice National prescription Schools today Schools Finland today The industrial tomorrow? Every school an Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 model, detailed Building capacity effective school prescription of what schools do Schools leading reform
  • 44.
    55 55 Public and private schools Government schools Observed performance difference Government dependent private Benchmarking international Government independent private Difference after accounting for socio-economic background of students and schools % 0 20 40 60 80 -150 100 -100 -50 0 50 100 Score point difference Luxembourg Japan Italy best practice Switzerland Finland Denmark Czech Republic Sweden Hungary Austria Public schools Private schools Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Portugal perform better perform better United States Netherlands Slovak Republic Korea Ireland Spain Canada Mexico New Zealand Germany OECD United Kingdom
  • 45.
    Pooled international dataset,effects of selected 56 56 Benchmarking international school/system factors on science performance after accounting for all other factors in the model 100 School principal‟s positive evaluation of quality of 90 Schools with more educational materials competing schools 80 (gross only) (gross only) Schools with greater best practice Score point difference in science 70 autonomy (resources) 60 (gross and net) School activities to 50 promote sciencehour of One additional learning self-study or homework (gross and net) 40 One additional hour of (gross and net) 30 science learning at school School resultsnet) (gross and posted Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Approx. one 20 school year publicly (grossselective Academically and net) 10 schools (gross and net) but no system-wide effect 0 Schools practicing ability One additional hour of out- grouping (gross and net) 10 of-school lessons Each additional 10% of School principal‟s (gross funding public and net) 20 perception that lack of (gross only) Effect after accounting qualified teachers hinders 30 for the socio-economic Measured effect Gross instruction background of Net (gross only) students, schools and countries OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies from Tomorrow‟s World, Table 6.1a
  • 46.
    57 57 Benchmarking international Strong ambitions Devolved Integrated best practice educational responsibility, the school as the centre opportunities of action From prescribed Accountability forms of teaching and Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 assessment towards personalised learning Access to best practice and quality professional development
  • 47.
    High science performance 58 58 560 Durchschnittliche Finland High average performance High average performance Benchmarking international Schülerleistungen im Large socio-economic disparities High social equity Bereich Mathematik 540 Canada New Zealand Japan Netherlands Australia best practice 520 Korea Germany United Kingdom Czech Republic Belgium Austria Switzerland Ireland Strong socio- Hungary Socially equitable Sweden economic impact on 500 Poland distribution of learning student performance France Denmark opportunities United States Spain Iceland Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Slovak Republic Norway Luxembourg 480 Portugal Greece Italy 460 Early selection and institutional differentiation Low average performance Low average performance High degree of stratification 440 Large socio-economic disparities Low degree of stratification High social equity 6 Low science performance
  • 48.
    59 59 Paradigm shifts Benchmarking international The old bureaucratic education system The modern enabling education system Hit & miss Universal high standards Uniformity Embracing diversity best practice Provision Outcomes Bureaucratic – look up Devolved – look outwards Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Talk equity Deliver equity Received wisdom Data and best practice Prescription Informed profession Demarcation Collaboration
  • 49.
    Creating a knowledge-richprofession in which schools and 60 60 Benchmarking international teachers have the authority to act, the necessary knowledge to do so wisely, and access to effective support systems The future of education systems is “knowledge rich” best practice Informed Informed professional prescription judgement, the teacher as a “knowledge worker” National Professional Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 prescription judgement Uninformed Uninformed professional prescription, teachers judgement, teachers implement curricula working in isolation The tradition of education systems has been “knowledge poor”
  • 50.
    61 61 Benchmarking international  www.oecd.org; www.pisa.oecd.org – All national and international publications – The complete micro-level database best practice  email: pisa@oecd.org  Thank you ! Andreas.Schleicher@OECD.org Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 … and remember: Without data, you are just another person with an opinion
  • 51.
    62 62 Do teachers trust in their own effectiveness? Making a significant Successful with students Making progress with Benchmarking international educational difference in their class students Australia Dark green bars Austria represent teachers Belgium (Fl.) Brazil who strongly agree Bulgaria best practice Denmark Estonia Hungary Iceland Light green bars Ireland represent teachers Italy Korea who agree Lithuania Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain Turkey TALIS Average 23% 69% 19% 76% 61% 22% 0 100 0 100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 40 50 60 70 80 90 10 20 30 0
  • 52.
    Putting the World Benchmarking international into World-Class Education best practice 63 63 Washington, July 10, 2009 10% 30% 40% 50% 60% 80% 90% 20% 70% 0% 100% Bulgaria Estonia Hungary Slovak Republic Lithuania Source: OECD, TALIS Database. Slovenia Poland 8% Ireland Denmark Norway Austria Administrative tasks TALIS Average Turkey Belgium (Fl.) Keeping order in the classroom Korea Malta Italy 13% Spain Time actually used for teaching and learning Australia Portugal Iceland Malaysia How much time is actually used for learning? Mexico 4.9 Brazil Figure
  • 53.
    Putting the World Benchmarking international into World-Class Education best practice 64 64 Washington, July 10, 2009 % 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 100 Australia Austria Belgium (Fl.) Brazil Bulgaria 75th-95th percentile Denmark Estonia Hungary Source: OECD, TALIS Database. Iceland Ireland Italy 50th-75th percentile Korea Lithuania Malaysia Malta Mexico 25th-50th percentile Norway Poland Percentiles of time on spent on task Portugal Slovak Republic Slovenia 5th-25th percentile Spain Turkey 4.10 Some teachers lose much more time than others TALIS Average Figure
  • 54.
    65 Professional development 65 Benchmarking international r Countries are investing significantly in teachers‟ professional development but there appear to be real issues about matching demand best practice and supply, cost and benefit. r There is a lack of suitable development activities on offer to satisfy teachers‟ demand Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education and it is notable that those teachers who take part in more days of development are more likely to have to contribute towards the cost themselves
  • 55.
    66 66 Benchmarking international Comparison of the level and intensity of Average days of professional development undertaken participation in professional development 40 TALIS Average Mexico 35 Korea best practice Italy 30 Bulgaria Poland Spain 25 Portugal Brazil 20 Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education TALIS Average 15 Hungary Turkey Estonia Iceland 10 Denmark Malaysia Lithuania Austria Norway Australia Slovenia Slovak Republic Belgium (Fl.) Ireland Malta 5 0 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Percentage of teachers undertaking professional development Source: OECD. Table 3.1 Figure 3.2
  • 56.
    67 67 Relatively few teachersImpacto?the kinds of professional participate in development which they find has the largest impact on their work Benchmarking international Comparison of teachers participating in professional development activities and teachers reporting moderate or high level impact by types of activity % 100 best practice 90 80 70 60 50 40 Average 30 Austria Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education 20 10 0 Participation Participation Participation Participation Participation Participation Participation Participation Participation Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact Impact Individual and collaborative researchReading professional literature MentoringObservation visits to conferences and Qualification programmes improve teaching and workshops Informal dialogue to CoursesProfessional development network and peer observationother schools Education Figure 3.15
  • 57.
    68 68 Benchmarking international Relatively few teachers participate in the kinds of professional development which they find has the largest impact on their work Comparison of teachers participating in professional development activities and teachers reporting moderate or high level impact by types of activity best practice Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Figure 3.15
  • 58.
    70 70 Benchmarking international The teachers who paid most also did most professional development Paid no cost Paid some cost Paid all cost Days of development best practice 100 90 80 70 60 50 Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education 40 30 20 10 0 TALIS… Slovak… Portugal Malaysia Spain Brazil Denmark Austria Lithuania Italy Norway Iceland Poland Australia Korea Hungary Slovenia Bulgaria Estonia Malta Turkey Ireland Mexico Belgium (Fl.) Countries are ranked in descending order of percentage of teachers having paid all of the cost of development they took Figure Source: OECD. Table 3.5a 3.10
  • 59.
    71 71 It‟s not just about more of the same For what type of professional development Benchmarking international do teachers report a high level of need? % 70 60 best practice 50 40 30 20 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 10 0 Teaching ICT teaching Student Instructional Subject field Student Content and Student Teaching in a Classroom School special skills discipline and practices counselling performance assessment multicultural management management learning needs behaviour standards practices setting and students problems administration Areas are ranked in descending order of the international average where teachers report a high level of need for development. Source: OECD. Table 3.2 Figure 3.6
  • 60.
    76 Teacher appraisal and feedback 76 Benchmarking international r Teachers generally respond positively to appraisal and feedback but such practices are not widespread best practice r Connection between school evaluation and teacher appraisal/feedback can be effective in influencing teaching practices Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education r Three-quarters reported that they would receive no recognition for improving the quality of their work or for being more innovative in their teaching
  • 61.
    77 77 Does appraisal and feedback make a difference for teaching? Benchmarking international Percentage of teachers reporting that appraisal and feedback led to a moderate or large change in the following: A development or training plan for teachers to improve their teaching Emphasis placed by teachers on improving student test scores in their teaching Teaching of students with special learning needs % Teaching of students in a multicultural setting best practice 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 30 20 10 0 Malaysia Lithuania Portugal Korea Spain Austria Brazil Denmark Poland Italy Norway Australia Slovenia TALIS Average Hungary Malta Mexico Bulgaria Estonia Turkey Ireland Iceland Slovak Republic Belgium (Fl.) Countries are ranked in descending order of the percentage of teachers who have received no appraisal or feedback. Figure Source: OECD. Table 5.1 and 5.3 5.6
  • 62.
    78 78 Does appraisal and feedback make a difference for the job? Benchmarking international Opportunities for professional development activities A change in the likelihood of career advancement Public recognition from the principal and/or colleagues 100 Changes in work responsibilites that make the job more attractive % 90 80 best practice 70 60 50 40 30 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 20 10 0 Australia Bulgaria Slovenia Malta Estonia Hungary Iceland Malaysia Korea Portugal Slovak Republic Ireland Lithuania Denmark Spain Austria Poland Brazil Mexico TALIS Average Norway Belgium (Fl.) Italy Turkey Countries are ranked in descending order of changes in teachers' opportunities for professional development activities. Source: OECD. Table 5.5. Figure 5.5
  • 63.
    79 Perception of teachers of the impact of appraisal and 79 feedback in their school Benchmarking international Teachers who would receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards if they improve the quality of their teaching Teachers who would receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards if they are more innovative in their teaching Teachers whose school principal takes steps to alter the monetary rewards of a persistently underperforming teacher Teachers will be dismissed because of sustained poor performance in teacher's school 80 best practice % 60 40 20 0 Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education 20 40 60 80 Countries are ranked in descending order of percentage of teachers reporting to receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards for an improvement in the quality of their teaching. Figure Source: OECD. Table 5.9. 5.7
  • 64.
    80 80 Some teachers are left alone Benchmarking international Teachers who received no appraisal or feedback and teachers in schools that had no school evaluation in the previous five years 100 90 No appraisal or feedback No school evaluation 80 % best practice 70 60 50 40 30 Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education 20 10 0 Australia Malta Slovenia Hungary Estonia Bulgaria Iceland Portugal Italy Ireland Austria Lithuania Malaysia Spain Brazil Denmark Norway Mexico Poland Slovak Republic Belgium (Fl.) Korea Turkey Countries are ranked in descending order of the percentage of teachers who have received no appraisal or feedback. Source: OECD. Table 5.1 and 5.3 Figure 5.3
  • 65.
    81 81 Benchmarking international School principals according to their level of management styles by country 1.5 Score on administrative leadership scale Bulgaria 1.0 Malaysia Turkey best practice Norway Brazil 0.5 Mexico Italy Ireland Hungary 0.0 Austria Portugal Slovak Republic Slovenia Lithuania Malta Poland Belgium (Fl.) Korea Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 -0.5 Spain Australia Iceland -1.0 Estonia -1.5 Denmark -2.0 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Score on instructional leadership scale Countries in green have a high average in principal involvement in decision making, while countries in red principals have lower than average. Figure Source: OECD 6.2
  • 66.
    82 82 > ISCED5 (Bachelor Female Full-time Permanent Years of employment Contract teaching Benchmarking international degree) Australia + Austria + - Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy Belgium (Fl.) - + Brazil - best practice Bulgaria - Denmark + + Estonia + Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Korea + - + + + Lithuania Malaysia + - + Malta + Mexico + Norway + + Poland - Portugal + Slovak Republic + + Slovenia + - Spain Turkey + +
  • 67.
    83 83 Benchmarking international School Number of providing School days of induction providing professional process mentor for development for new teachers Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy teachers Australia Austria best practice Belgium (Fl.) Brazil Bulgaria + Denmark + Estonia + + Hungary Iceland + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Ireland Italy + Korea + Lithuania + Malaysia + Malta + Mexico + Norway Poland Portugal + Slovak Republic Slovenia + Spain Turkey
  • 68.
    84 84 Benchmarking international Index of Index of classroom Index of classroom Index of classroom Index of direct teacher- teaching teaching transmission teaching student practice: practice: beliefs about practice: relations student- enhanced instruction structuring oriented activities Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy Australia + + Austria + + + - + Belgium (Fl.) + + + best practice Brazil + + Bulgaria + + Denmark + + Estonia + + Hungary + + Iceland + + Ireland + + + + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Italy + + + Korea + + + + Lithuania + + + Malaysia + + Malta + Mexico + + + Norway + + + Poland + - + + Portugal + + + + Slovak Republic + + + Slovenia + + + Spain + + + Turkey + + +
  • 69.
    Index of Index of 85 85 Benchmarking international constructivi st beliefs exchange and coordination Index of professional about collaboration for teaching instruction Australia + Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy Austria + + Belgium (Fl.) + + Brazil Bulgaria + best practice Denmark + Estonia + + Hungary + + Iceland + + Ireland + Italy + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Korea + + Lithuania + Malaysia + Malta + Mexico Norway + + Poland + + Portugal + + Slovak Republic + Slovenia + Spain + + Turkey +
  • 70.
    Important 86 86 Benchmarking international Never received Work in Effective Important schools that teachers receive aspect for aspect for teacher appraisal or did not have an more monetary or teacher appraisal: feedback evaluation non-monetary appraisal: innovative from any within the last rewards in the student test teaching source 5 years school. scores* Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy practices* Australia Austria Belgium (Fl.) best practice Brazil + + + Bulgaria Denmark Estonia - Hungary Iceland + Ireland Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Italy Korea Lithuania Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway Poland Portugal + Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain Turkey
  • 71.
    87 87 Important aspect for teacher Appraisal Appraisal impact: opportunities for Appraisal impact: public recognition appraisal: Benchmarking international impact: a change professional from the professional in salary* development principal and/or development activities* your colleagues* undertaken* Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy Australia Austria + Belgium (Fl.) + best practice Brazil Bulgaria Denmark Estonia + Hungary + Iceland Ireland + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Italy + Korea + Lithuania + Malaysia Malta + Mexico Norway + Poland Portugal Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain + Turkey
  • 72.
    88 88 Benchmarking international Appraisal impact: changes in teachers' Important aspect for School evaluation work responsibilities school evaluations: Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy published* that make the job student test scores* more attractive* Australia Austria best practice Belgium (Fl.) Brazil + Bulgaria + Denmark Estonia + Hungary Iceland Ireland Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Italy Korea Lithuania Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway Poland Portugal + Slovak Republic Slovenia + Spain Turkey
  • 73.
    Index of Index of 89 89 Benchmarking international framing and promoting communicating instructional Index of Index of Index of supervision of accountability the school improvements bureaucratic instruction in role of the goals and and rule-following the school principal curricular professional Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy development development Australia Austria Belgium (Fl.) best practice Brazil Bulgaria Denmark Estonia Hungary Iceland Ireland + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Italy Korea Lithuania + Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway Poland Portugal + Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain Turkey
  • 74.
    Index of 90 90 Index of Index of school climate: school climate: Index of a lack Index of school school autonomy in resources: hiring teachers Benchmarking international student teachers‟ of personnel shortage of and delinquency working morale Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy materials determining salaries Australia Austria - + Belgium (Fl.) - best practice Brazil Bulgaria Denmark Estonia Hungary Iceland Ireland Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Italy Korea Lithuania Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Republic - Slovenia Spain Turkey
  • 75.
    Index of school Index of school 91 91 autonomy in budgeting Index of school autonomy in autonomy: curriculum School average (formulating Public school Benchmarking international student policy (courses class size and allocating and textbooks offered, course the school Significant variables in the final net models: Self-efficacy content) budget) Australia Austria Belgium (Fl.) Brazil best practice Bulgaria Denmark Estonia Hungary - Iceland Ireland - Italy Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Korea Lithuania Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway + Poland - Portugal - Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain Turkey
  • 76.
    Direct Constructivist Structuring 92 92 transmission beliefs about beliefs about teaching teaching practices Student oriented teaching practices teaching Benchmarking international Australia Austria Belgium (Fl.) - Brazil - + Bulgaria + Job satisfaction (dependent on…) best practice Denmark Estonia Hungary + Iceland Ireland Italy Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Korea + Lithuania + + Malaysia Malta Mexico Norway - Poland Portugal + - + Slovak Republic + Slovenia - Spain + + Table Turkey + 4.13
  • 77.
    Classroom Teacher- Enhanced Teacher's self- 93 93 Benchmarking international activities disciplinary climate student relations efficacy Australia + + + Austria + + + Belgium (Fl.) + + + Brazil + + + Bulgaria + + + Job satisfaction (dependent on…) best practice Denmark + + + Estonia + + + Hungary + + + Iceland + + + Ireland + + + Italy + + + Korea + + + Putting the World Washington, July 10, 2009 into World-Class Education Lithuania + + + Malaysia + + + Malta + + + Mexico + + + Norway + + + Poland + + + Portugal + + + Slovak Republic + + + Slovenia + + + Spain + + + Table Turkey + + + 4.13
  • 78.
    Putting the World Benchmarking international into World-Class Education best practice 94 94 Washington, July 10, 2009 Thank you !

Editor's Notes

  • #3 And policy makers do this because in this world where all work that can be digitised, automated or outsourced can now be done anywhere in the world by those who are best prepared, the yardstick for success is no longer improvement by national standards, but the best performing education systems internationally. I will begin my presentation this evening by showing how the global talent pool has changed, in response to the forces of globalisation and technological changeThen examine what international comparisons can tell us about this. I will show you where we see the United States and try to contrast this with the best performing education systems, that give you a sense of what is possible in education, terms of the quality of educational outcomes and equity in the distribution of educational opportunities. And I will conclude with tying the results to some of the policy levers that emerge from international comparisons.
  • #4 Look at the proportion of individuals successfully completing secondary school in the 1960s, still sort of the minimum entrance ticket to the knowledge economy. You can see, that two generations ago, the United States was well ahead of everyone else, at the top rank, and evidence at the OECD suggests that today’s economic success of the US draws at least in part on its traditionally high standards of human capital. But already in the 1970s, some countries had caught up, in the 1980s, the expansion of education continued, and the relative standing of countries changed yet again in the 1990s. While the US was number one in the 1960s in terms of the proportion of individuals completing high-school, in the 1990s it was at rank 13, not because standards have fallen, but because they have risen so much faster elsewhere. Korea shows you what is possible. Two generations ago, Korea had the standard of living of Afghanistan today and it was among the lowest performers in education among OECD countries. Today it is the top performer in terms of successful school leavers. But there are many other successful countries as well.
  • #5 The pace of change is most clearly visible in college education, and I want to bring two more dimensions into the picture here.Each dot on this chart represents one country. The horizontal axis shows you the college graduation rate, the proportion of an age group that comes out of the system with a college degree. The vertical axis shows you how much it costs to educate a graduate per year.
  • #6 *Lets now add where the money comes from into the picture, the larger the dot, the larger the share of private spending on college education, such as tuition.The chart shows the US as the country with the highest college graduation rate, and the highest level of spending per student. The US is also among the countries with the largest share of resources generated through the private sector. That allows the US to spend roughly twice as much per student as Europe. US, FinlandThe only thing I have not highlighted so far is that this was the situation in 1995. And now watch this closely as you see how this changed between 1995 and 2005.
  • #7 You see that in 2000, five years, later, the picture looked very different. While in 1995 the US was well ahead of any other country – you see that marked by the dotted circle, in 2000 several other countries had reached out to this frontier. Look at Australia, in pink.
  • #12 That was all very quick, let us go through this development once again