Download as PDF, PPTX
More Related Content
Similar to Mega trends shaping societies and impacting on higher education - dublin, 31 may 2017
Mega trends shaping societies and impacting on higher education - dublin, 31 may 2017
- 1. MEGA-TRENDS SHAPING SOCIETIES ANDIMPACTING ON HIGHER EDUCATION Dirk Van Damme OECD/EDU/IMEP – @VanDammeEDU
- 2. 2 Ageing Populations Global EconomicIntegration International inequality Intergenerational Transmission of Disadvantage Changing balance of global power More satisfied with life? Lower voter turnout Skills mismatch Women in the labour market and childbirth More diverse families, generally smaller and with older parents Almost ubiquitous access and use of computing and the Internet A digital society Knowledge-intensive Economies Migration and mobility Urban life Obesity epidemic Mega-trends…
- 3.
- 4. Question: Starbucks was launchedin 1971 in Pike Place Market in Seattle. It has since grown into a major multinational. How many countries does Starbucks currently operate in? a. 35 b. 52 c. 67 Globalisation 4
- 5. Sources: H&M (2015),H&M Worldwide website; Inditex (2015), Our History, Inditex website; Tarzian, JoanMarie (2015), Santander Corporate Communication – International Media Relations; Starbucks (2015), Company Information, Starbucks website; Hoover, Joan (2015), Apple Investor Relations; Spencer, Graham (2015), Contributor, Macstories. 5 Global expansion of multinational companies The global reach of five companies in food services, garments, banking, and technology, 1988-2015 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 NumberofCountries Starbucks Inditex H&M Apple
- 6.
- 7. 7 Globalisation also generatesinequalities and exclusion. How strong is the backlash against globalisation among the excluded
- 8. Global expansion &redistribution of qualifications Global distribution of tertiary educated 25-34 y-olds in 2013 and 2030 8
- 9. 9 United States, 13.7% China, 17.8% Russian Federation, 10.9% Japan, 6.9% India, 11.4% Korea,3.9% Mexico, 3.0%France, 2.6% Germany, 2.0% United Kingdom, 2.9% Indonesia, 4.3% Spain, 2.2% Canada, 2.1% Brazil, 3.0% Turkey, 1.7% Other, 11.7% Share in academic graduates 2010 United States 43.2% United Kingdom 13.8% Netherlands 6.0%Germany 4.3% Canada 4.3% Australia 4.3% Switzerland 3.5% France 3.0% Japan 2.5% Sweden 2.6% Korea 2.2% Hong Kong 2.0% Other 8.4% Share in academic excellence THEWUR 2012 Global distribution of academic graduates and academic excellence
- 10. 10 Globally connected networksin research
- 11. Global integration ofqualifications? 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Japan Finland Netherlands Sweden Australia Norway Flanders(Belgium) England(UK) England/N.… UnitedStates CzechRepublic OECDaverage Poland Canada NorthernIreland… Austria Germany Ireland France Denmark Estonia SlovakRepublic Korea RussianFederation Spain Italy Below upper secondary education Upper secondary or post-secondary non-tertiary education Tertiary education 11 Proportion of 25-64 year-olds scoring at PIAAC numeracy level 4 and 5, by educational attainment of the population (2012)
- 12.
- 13.
- 14. Question: Cybersecurity is perceivedas an increasing threat and risk, but is also a booming business. How many certified cybersecurity professionals are there in the world? a. 40,000 b. 80,000 c. 100,000 Cybersecurity 14
- 15. 15 Number of certifiedindividuals in cybersecurity worldwide 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 Numberofindividuals Source: OECD (2015) Digital Economy Outlook 2015 cited in OECD (2016), Trends Shaping Education 2016, OECD Publishing, Paris doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/trends_edu-2016-en Note: The International Information Systems Security Certification Consortium, otherwise known as (ISC)2, issues a range of cybersecurity certifications
- 16. 16 Commodification of highereducation as a risk
- 17. End of credentialism? Source:Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) (2012) 17
- 18. Formal education vsskills 18
- 19. Formal education vsskills 19
- 20. Credentialism as socialsecurity? 20
- 21. 21 New credentials: openbadges, nano- degrees, micro-credentials,etc.
- 22.
- 23. Gini coefficients ofincome inequality, mid-1980s and 2013, or latest date available 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 1985 2013 or latest Increase Little change Decrease 23
- 24. Trends in realhousehold incomes at the bottom, the middle and the top, OECD average, 1985 = 1 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Bottom 10% Bottom 40% middle 50-90% Top 10% 24
- 25. Globalization and globalredistribution of income (Branko Milanovic’s “elephant chart”) 25
- 26. Amount of moneyspent by US households on child development 26
- 27. Average numeracy scoreby parent educational background (PEB) and inequality 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 0.18 0.23 0.28 0.33 0.38 Numeracyscore Inequality (Gini coefficient) Low PEB Medium PEB High PEB 27
- 28. The engine ofsocial mobility falters Australia Austria CanadaDenmark Estonia Finland France Germany Ireland Italy Japan Netherlands Norway Poland Spain Sweden United States Flanders (Belgium) England/N. Ireland (United Kingdom) Russian Federation* Average 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 12345678910 Upwardmobility Odds ratio inequality of opportunity low educational mobility inequality of opportunity high educational mobility equality of opportunity high educational mobility equality of opportunity low educational mobility 28
- 29.
- 30.
- 31. A Brave NewWorld Question: We have now become adept multi-taskers, capable of doing many things online at the same time. On average, how many things do we tend to do online at once? a. 6 b. 8 c. 10 31
- 32. Source: OECD (2014),Measuring the Digital Economy: A New Perspective. 32 Online multi-tasking: more efficient or more distracted? Average number of activities being performed online at the same time per Internet user, 2009 and 2013. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Numberofactivities 2009 2013
- 33.
- 34. Qualitative changes inskills demand Routine manual Nonroutine manual Routine cognitive Nonroutine analytic Nonroutine interpersonal 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2006 2009 Mean task input in percentiles of 1960 task distribution (US) 34
- 35. Mismatch between skillssupply and demand 35
- 36.
- 37. Question: On average acrossOECD countries, the number of managerial positions held by women has increased by 11% between 2000-2012. In which country has it increased most? a. Italy b. Chile c. Luxembourg Female leadership 37
- 38. Source: International LabourOrganization (2015), Global Report, Women in Business and Management Gaining Momentum. 26.9 32.7 14.3 18 23.6 25.8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 %offemalemanagers 2000 2012 % More female managers Percentage of managerial positions held by women in private and public sectors, 2000-2012 38
- 39. Female leadership Source: WorldBank and Inter-Parliamentary Union (2015). 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Japan Hungary Turkey Ireland Chile Korea,Rep. SlovakRepublic Estonia UnitedStates CzechRepublic Greece Israel UnitedKingdom Poland Canada Australia France OECDaverage Luxembourg NewZealand Switzerland Portugal Italy Austria Slovenia Germany Mexico Netherlands Denmark Belgium Norway Iceland Spain Finland Sweden Women in national parliament 1990 2014 39
- 40. Women’s first marriage Question: In1990, the average age for women’s first marriage was 25. What is the average age now? a. 28 b. 30 c. 32 40
- 41. Source: Eurostat (2015),Marriage and divorces data. Marriage age is rising Mean age at first marriage for men and women, 1990, 2000, and 2013. 41 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 Age 1990 2000 2013 1990 2000 2013 Women Men
- 42. 42 Female graduation rates Percentageof female graduates in tertiary levels of education (2014) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Sweden CostaRica SlovakRepublic Norway Latvia CzechRepublic Iceland Argentina Lithuania SouthAfrica Slovenia Belgium Hungary Portugal Spain Denmark Canada NewZealand Israel Finland Austria Italy Australia EU22average Luxembourg Colombia UnitedStates RussianFederation SaudiArabia OECDaverage Netherlands UnitedKingdom Mexico Chile Indonesia China Turkey India Switzerland Germany Japan Bachelor’s or equivalent Doctoral or equivalent %
- 43. 43 Women's earnings asa percentage of men's earnings, tertiary graduates (2014) 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Chile Brazil Israel SlovakRepublic Mexico UnitedStates Hungary Greece Korea Austria Poland Estonia Ireland CzechRepublic Portugal Canada Germany France Italy OECDaverage Netherlands EU22average NewZealand Colombia Norway Australia Lithuania Latvia UnitedKingdom Finland Denmark Luxembourg Switzerland Spain Belgium Sweden Slovenia Turkey CostaRica %
- 44. WHAT DO THESEMEGA- TRENDS IMPLY FOR SKILLS IN THE FUTURE WORKPLACE? 44
- 45. Trends Affecting FutureSkills Demand 45
- 46.