Effective change in schools oecd pont 2018 mad 6 18
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•110 views
Education policy implementation: a framework for policy makers to help ensure that policies have impact in classrooms. Stakeholder engagement, smart policy design, conducive context and a coherent strategy
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Effective change in schools oecd pont 2018 mad 6 18
Similar to Effective change in schools oecd pont 2018 mad 6 18 (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Effective change in schools oecd pont 2018 mad 6 18
- 1. IMPLEMENTING POLICIES: EFFECTIVE CHANGE IN EDUCATION 1 Beatriz Pont Policy Advice and Implementation Division Directorate for Education and Skills OECD Education Policy Outlook Dialogues, Madrid, 11 June 2018
- 2. Education policy implementation is a purposeful and multidirectional change process aiming to put a specific policy into practice and which may affect a given education system on several levels. From principles to implementation practice: Ensuring that policies reach schools, students and classrooms
- 3. 3 The education policy making process is changing Problem def Agenda setting Policy options Policy develop ment Policy implement ation Policy evaluation
- 4. Problem def Agenda setting Policy options Policy develop ment Policy implement ation Policy evaluation 4 • Context • Contextual factors (politics, timing) matter • Changing governance and institutions • Policy making • Piece meal approaches (lacking coherence) • Lack of capacity (to do reform and on the ground) • Actors • Multiple actors (complexity): top down to co-construction • Resistance to reform (status quo) From theory To practice Implementation gap leads to failure in reforms The education policy making process is changing
- 5. Implementation gaps: research shows school improvement programmes don’t often reach the classroom Even after surmounting political challenges, once programmes are implemented: -Teacher training is usually insufficient or too superficial. -Context is not conducive enough for the policies to be enacted (Schedule, timing, lack of resources…). -Other reforms or parallel processes are often not considered (reform fatigue). Source: OECD (2015), Education Policy Outlook 2015: Making Reforms Happen, Chapter 9.
- 6. Design of reform: coherence Implementation Aligned planned Elements of education reform: a balancing act that goes beyond evidence base policy making
- 7. Problem def Agenda setting Policy options Policy develop ment Policy implement ation Policy evaluation 7 For policy success, both the content as well as the policy process are important Viennet, R. and B. Pont (2017), "Education policy implementation: A literature review and proposed framework", OECD Education Working Papers, No. 162, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/fc467a64-en A framework for policies to reach schools and classrooms
- 8. •The policy at least partially defined before implemented. Its justification, validity of its causal theory and goals, complementarity with other policies and feasibility affect whether it can be effectively implemented. Smart policy design •actors can interpret, react and influence implementation. Including them throughout the process facilitates long term success and prevent reactions against reforms. Inclusive stakeholder engagement •The process’ features are adapted to the structures and governance of its system at a given time, to the particular actors, and around the specific educational policy.Conducive context •A coherent plan outlines concrete measures to make the policy design operational, with sufficient resources, capacity building, communications, and engaging stakeholders. Coherent implementation strategy 8 A framework for policies to reach schools and classrooms
- 9. 46 38 37 36 26 24 4 0 10 20 30 40 50 Support education success for all Develop quality vocational education and training Increase completion of upper secondary education Consolidate ECEC Improve transitions between education and the labour market Strengthen quality and access in tertiary education Tackling system-level practices that hinder equity NumberofPolices Total Number of Policy Focus Areas of Key Reported Education Policies (2008-17) Education Policy Outlook 2018: Putting Student Learning at the Centre
- 10. Education Policy Outlook 2018: Putting Student Learning at the Centre 46 38 37 36 26 24 4 0 10 20 30 40 50 Support education success for all Develop quality vocational education and training Increase completion of upper secondary education Consolidate ECEC Improve transitions between education and the labour market Strengthen quality and access in tertiary education Tackling system-level practices that hinder equity NumberofPolices Total Number of Policy Focus Areas of Key Reported Education Policies (2008-17)
- 11. Different contexts, different issues, different policy implementation approaches: some lessons Looking for change and improvement across schools: Curriculum, teachers and schools Greece • 8 000 schools • 128 491 teachers • 1 221 777 students Japan • 36 223 schools • 908 045 teachers • 13 469 800 students Mexico • 259.000 schools • 2.064.500 teachers • 36.604. 570 students Norway • 2 900 schools • 58 000 teachers • 624 000 students • (1ry-LSE) Wales • 1 500 schools • 24 000 teachers • 465 000 students
- 12. 12 Vision: delivering excellence with equity in education, PISA 2015 Mean performance in science and strength of the socio-economic gradient Germany SwitzerlandBelgium AustriaFrance Czech Republic Luxembourg Hungary Slovak Republic Chile New Zealand Slovenia Australia Netherlands IrelandPoland Portugal United States SwedenSpain Lithuania Israel Greece Mexico Japan Estonia Finland Canada Korea United Kingdom Denmark Norway Latvia Italy Iceland Turkey 350 400 450 500 550 600 0510152025 Mean science score Percentage of variation in performance explained by socio-economic status Strength of the relationship between performance and socio-economic status is above the average Strength of the relationship between performance and socio-economic status is not statistically significantly different from the average Strength of the relationship between performance and socio-economic status is below the average OECD average OECD average Above-average science performance Below-average equity in education Above-average science performance Above-average equity in education Below-average science performance Below-average equity in education Below-average science performance Above-average equity in education
- 13. 13 Vision: delivering excellence with equity in education, PISA 2015 Mean performance in science and strength of the socio-economic gradient Germany SwitzerlandBelgium AustriaFrance Czech Republic Luxembourg Hungary Slovak Republic Chile New Zealand Slovenia Australia Netherlands IrelandPoland Portugal United States SwedenSpain Lithuania Israel Greece Mexico Japan Estonia Finland Canada Korea United Kingdom Denmark Norway Latvia Italy Iceland Turkey 350 400 450 500 550 600 0510152025 Mean science score Percentage of variation in performance explained by socio-economic status Strength of the relationship between performance and socio-economic status is above the average Strength of the relationship between performance and socio-economic status is not statistically significantly different from the average Strength of the relationship between performance and socio-economic status is below the average OECD average OECD average Above-average science performance Below-average equity in education Above-average science performance Above-average equity in education Below-average science performance Below-average equity in education Below-average science performance Above-average equity in education Vision defined? Is it clear? Related to education performance? • 5 year national education plan: Japan • White Paper n. 21: Norway (better classroom teaching and learning school-based through collaboration) • A vision for Wales: Education in Wales: Our National Mission (2017- 21) • 3 year plan: Greece • OVERLOADED with expectations?
- 15. 15 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Never teach jointly as a team in the same class Never observe other teachers' classes and provide feedback Never engage in joint activities across different classes and age groups (e.g. projects) Never take part in collaborative professional learning % Average Source: TALIS 2013 Results Percentage of lower secondary education teachers who report never doing the following activities, TALIS 2013 Well justified? Causal theory?
- 17. Why: obstacles to learning in schools, PISA 2015 0 10 20 30 40 Student truancy Students skipping classes Students lacking respect for teachers Student use of alcohol or illegal drugs Students intimidating or bullying other students Teachers not meeting individual students’ needs Teacher absenteeism Staff resisting change Teachers being too strict with students Teachers not being well-prepared for classes OECD average OECD (2016), "Student and teacher behaviour hindering learning: Results based on school principals' reports", in PISA 2015 Results (Volume II): Policies and Practices for Successful Schools, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264267510- graph26-en. Percentage of students in schools where the school principal reported that the following phenomena hinder student learning to some extent or a lot:
- 18. 18 Stakeholder engagement: roles of key actors Classroom practice Ministries Regional bodies Universities School owners School leaders Teachers Recognition of different roles and responsibilities
- 19. 19 A highly decentralised decisional system, EAG 2012 % of decisions taken at each level of government in public lower secondary education 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Norway OECD average School Local Regional or sub-regional Central or state Source: Education at a Glance, 2012 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Netherlands England Estonia Belgium(Fl.) CzechRepublic Hungary Iceland SlovakRepublic Indonesia Slovenia Ireland Australia Scotland Poland Sweden Chile Denmark OECDaverage Korea Italy Israel France Austria Belgium(Fr.) Switzerland Spain Germany Portugal UnitedStates Japan Canada Turkey Mexico Norway Luxembourg Greece School Local Regional or sub-regional Central or state
- 20. • The political environment • Governance • Complementary policies – Assessment policies – Curriculum reform – Initial teacher education • Institutions • System and school leadership: weak capacity and roles • Research and knowledge 20 Conducive context
- 21. 21 Public confidence in education system, 2005, 2013 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Iceland Ireland Finland Netherlands Denmark UnitedKingdom Belgium Norway Switzerland France Canada Slovenia NewZealand Austria Luxembourg Portugal Australia Sweden Italy Germany Japan CzechRepublic Israel Hungary Slovakia Poland Estonia UnitedStates Mexico Korea Spain Turkey Chile Greece 2013 2005 Source: World Gallup Poll 2013
- 22. 22 Educational leadership capacity -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 Index curriculum instructional Source: PISA 2015, Volume 2 The indexes are based on PISA specific items, based on principals reports, such as: • for curricular leadership : “I use student performance results to develop the school’s educational goals”, • for instructional leadership: “I promote teaching practices based on recent educational research”. Educational leadership capacity, PISA 2015
- 23. Strategy that brings clearly together Stakeholders: engaged in process of development? Co- construction Resources: sustainable? Timing: long term, allowing time for assimilation and ownership of concept Capacity building: Is it enough? How? Communications: want clarity or less national driven? Monitoring and evaluation 23 Implementation strategy
- 24. 24 Implementation strategy Draft strategy for lower secondary education in Norway 2012
- 25. • The policy at least partially defined before implemented. Its justification, validity of its causal theory and goals, complementarity with other policies and feasibility affect whether it can be effectively implemented. Smart policy design • actors can interpret, react and influence implementation. Including them throughout the process facilitates success. • Prevent reactions against reforms. Inclusive stakeholder engagement • The process’ features are adapted to the structures of its system at a given time, to the particular actors, and around the specific educational policy. Conducive context • A coherent plan outlines concrete measures to make the policy design operational, with sufficient resources, capacity building, communications, and engaging stakeholders. Coherent implementation strategy 25 Effective policy implementation for change in schools
- 26. 26 Implementing policies: supporting effective change in education Strategic advice Policy assessment Stakeholder engagement seminars New: OECD providing education policy implementation support from a comparative perspective
- 27. Thank you! For more information: Beatriz.pont@oecd.org (@beatrizpont) Follow us on: @OECDEduSkills @EduSkills OECD @EduSkills OECD www.oecd.org/edu www.oecd.org/skills
Editor's Notes
- We are going to be reviewing the main education context, situation and challenges so that throughout the course we can review them and provide responses: The aim is that you, as future policy makers in different national and international agencies, institutions, ministries, NGOs have the knowledge and skills to respond.
- Speaker notes: Education systems reported policies on the following to respond to the policy priorities. The number of policies on supporting education success for all is by far the largest but followed closely by policies on VET, completion of upper secondary education and ECEC. Strikingly, the number of reported policies on system- level practices is rather low at 4. (NOTE: this might be because implementing these types of policies requires structural changes or rearrangements of strategies, and programmes that have been in place for a long time and are, therefore, expensive and might lack public support) But let’s have a look at what is behind all these bars…
- Speaker notes: Education systems reported policies on the following to respond to the policy priorities. The number of policies on supporting education success for all is by far the largest but followed closely by policies on VET, completion of upper secondary education and ECEC. Strikingly, the number of reported policies on system- level practices is rather low at 4. (NOTE: this might be because implementing these types of policies requires structural changes or rearrangements of strategies, and programmes that have been in place for a long time and are, therefore, expensive and might lack public support) But let’s have a look at what is behind all these bars…
- We discussed this earlier: Data refers to the percentage of "yes" answers to the question: "In the city or area where you live, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the educational system or the schools?“ Source: Gallup World Poll (database) 2007 & 2016, in OECD (2017) Government at a Glance, OECD Publishing.