Achieving quality and equity in education - International  evidence NUT National Education Conference 2008 5-6 July 2008 Michael Davidson Directorate for Education OECD

Outline How do countries compare in the quality of learning outcomes? How equitable are learning outcomes? What polices and features are associated with higher student performance?

Sources of evidence “Education at a Glance” – annual publication of internationally comparable indicators PISA- Programme for International Student Assessment 15 year old students assessed in reading, mathematics and science across over 50 countries 1st assessment in 2000, then in 2003, 2006….

A three-yearly global assessment that… PISA A three-yearly global assessment that… … examines the performance of 15-year-olds in key subject areas as well as a wider range of educational outcomes Including students attitudes to learning, their beliefs about themselves, and their learning strategies … collects contextual data from students schools, parents and systems to identify policy levers Coverage Representative samples of between 3,500 and 50,000 15-year-old students drawn in each country Total of 400,000 students. Most federal countries also draw regional samples PISA covers roughly 90% of the world economy . Governments are aware of this challenge and I am happy to present the results of our latest PISA assessment where 57 countries participated. In my remarks today, I will begin by showing where countries stand in terms of the science knowledge and skills of their 15-year-olds. I will then highlight where education systems can be, by showing you what the best performing education systems achieve in terms of quality, equity, and efficiency. And I will conclude with identifying some of the policy levers that PISA identifies for raising quality and improving equity.

Some context- trends in the global skill supply

School completion A world of change in the global skill supply Approximated by percentage of persons with high school or equivalent qualfications in the age groups 55-64, 45-55, 45-44 und 25-34 years 1 % 26 18 27 1. Excluding ISCED 3C short programmes 2. Year of reference 2004 3. Including some ISCED 3C short programmes 3. Year of reference 2003.

And in the UK, early drop out from education is relatively high Percentage of 15-19 year olds not in formal education (2005) %

University graduation rates Percentage of tertiary type A graduates to the population at the typical age of graduation % Five years ago the UK rate exceeded the OECD average by 9 percentage points; now that margin is reduced to 3 percentage points Text has not been updated A3.1

And expectations of UK students are low… Percentage of 15 year-olds expecting to complete higher education (2003) % 1 UK response rate too low to ensure comparability

What about second chances What about second chances? Expected hours in non-formal job-related training (2003) This chart shows the expected number of hours in non-formal job-related education and training, over a forty year period, for 25-to-64 year olds. Text has not been updated C5.1a

Quality in learning outcomes

Mean science scores – OECD countries This chart shows the scores and relative positions of the 30 OECD countries which participated in PISA 2006. Each country’s score is represented by a band which includes the estimated average score and an indication of the confidence of that estimate. The United Kingdom’s mean score for science for 2006 is 515. This compares to the highest score amongst the European OECD countries of 563 for Finland and the lowest of 473 for Greece. OECD average 500 OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World, Table 2.1c

Mean reading scores – OECD countries Although the main focus of PISA 2006 is science, some of the testing time was also devoted to reading and mathematics to provide updates on country performance since PISA 2003. This chart shows the scores and relative positions of the 30 OECD countries which participated in PISA 2006. Again, each country’s score is represented by a band which includes the estimated average score and an indication of the confidence of that estimate. the United Kingdom’s average score is 495. In Europe the highest scores were obtained by Finland, Ireland, Poland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium and Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Estonia and Slovenia. In relative terms, the United Kingdom ranked 13th among the 30 OECD countries and had an above-average proportion of top-performers. 30% of 15-year-olds in the United Kingdom reached at least Level 4 on the reading scale which is about the same as the OECD average of 29%. OECD average 492 OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World, Table 6.1c

Mean mathematics scores – OECD countries This chart shows the mathematics scores and relative positions of the 30 OECD countries which participated in PISA 2006. The United Kingdom’s average score is 495 score points in mathematics, on a scale that had an OECD average of 498 score points. In relative terms, the UK ranked 18th among the 30 OECD countries. In Europe the highest scores were obtained by Finland (548), the Netherlands (531) and Switzerland (530). In mathematics, the UK has a slightly below average proportion of top-performers. 11% of 15-year-olds in Belgium reached at least Level 5 on the mathematics scale (OECD average 13%). The high percentages in Europe were Finland (24%), Switzerland (23%) and the Netherlands (21%).  20% of 15-year-olds in the UK failed to reach the baseline Level 2 of mathematics performance, which requires students to recognise mathematical problems requiring only direct inferences, to extract information from a single source and to make literal interpretations of their results. This is about the same as the OECD average (21%).  OECD average 498 OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World, Table 6.2c

Distribution of student performance – science only

Top and bottom performers in science These students can consistently identify, explain and apply scientific knowledge, link different information sources and explanations and use evidence from these to justify decisions, demonstrate advanced scientific thinking in unfamiliar situations… These students often confuse key features of a scientific investigation, apply incorrect information, mix personal beliefs with facts in support of a position… Large proportion of top performers Large prop. of poor perf. 20

How equitable are student outcomes? Socio-economic background Immigrant students Differences between school

High performance High SES effect High performance Low SES effect Science performance UK has above average performance in science but above average impact of social background on student performance Decreasing effect of socioeconomic background Low performance High SES effect Low performance Low SES effect

How well do immigrant students perform in science OECD average = 500 PISA 2006: Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World, Figure 4.2a.

Immigrant students -lessons Schools should do better in building on the emotive capital of immigrant students as a driving source for enhancing their learning Much of this motivational potential dissipates as students stay longer in the country Institutional barriers (selection/tracking) tend to reinforce socio-economic disparities Language is a key foundation Immersion combined with support can work

Equitable educational standards across schools

Variation in student performance There is greater variation in student performance in the UK than in almost any other country 20 OECD (2007), Learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from PISA 2006, Table 4.1a

Variation in student performance In some countries, parents can rely on high and consistent standards across schools In particular in Canada and Finland average student performance is high… … and largely unrelated to the individual schools in which students are enrolled. Variation of performance within schools Variation of performance between schools OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from PISA 2003, Table 4.1a

Some school and system factors that make a difference Some policy levers Some school and system factors that make a difference

Some myths No relationship between size of countries and average performance No relationship between proportion of immigrants and average performance Few differences in students’ reported test motivation Limited impact of national item preferences .

Money matters - but other things do too What about funding? Money matters - but other things do too Spending per student is positively associated with average student performance… … but not a guarantee for high outcomes To support equity, spending should be directed to those that need it most

It’s how money is spent that matters Factors affecting salary cost per student as a percentage of GDP per capita, at the upper secondary level of education (2004)

What about public versus private schools ? After adjusting for socio-economic background, the performance advantage of private schools disappears % Score point difference Private schools perform better Public schools perform better

Does school choice increase social differences between schools? Index of school separation *Greater choice tends to be associated with larger differences in social composition of schools

So what does make a difference?

Effects of selected school/system factors on science performance School principal’s positive evaluation of quality of educational materials (gross only) 92% of UK students in schools that compete with 1 or more school in same area; 74% OECD average. Schools with more competing schools (gross only) Schools with greater autonomy (resources) (gross and net) School activities to promote science learning (gross and net) One additional hour of self-study or homework (gross and net) One additional hour of science learning at school (gross and net) 93% of UK students in schools posting achievement data publicly (OECD 38%) School results posted publicly (gross and net) Academically selective schools (gross and net) but no system-wide effect 19% of UK students in schools with no vacant science teaching positions (OECD 38%), 73% where all vacant positions had been filled (OECD 59%), 11% where principals report that instruction is hindered by a lack of qualified science teachers Schools practicing ability grouping (gross and net) One additional hour of out-of-school lessons (gross and net) 20 Each additional 10% of public funding (gross only) School principal’s perception that lack of qualified teachers hinders instruction (gross only) Effect after accounting for the socio-economic background of students, schools and countries Measured effect OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies from Tomorrow’s World, Table 6.1a

What does all this all show? The global education world is changing Progress in UK but not as fast as some other countries High quality and high equity of student outcomes is achievable Quality and equity challenges for the UK Some pointers to policies and practices that are associated with better student performance Not a single recipe for success but a basis for learning from others

Thank you for listening ! www.oecd.org/edu/eag; Education at a Glance All comparative indicators on education www.pisa.oecd.org All national and international publications The complete micro-level database Michael.Davidson@OECD.org