1. Report from Countries Austria Barbara Herzog-Punzenberger, Austrian Academy of Sciences Rüdiger Teutsch, Ministry of Education

2. Context General political context Policy Development by the Ministry of Education Leadership Organisation Development Evidence based Policy Communication

3. Context Total population: 8 331 930 (2007) Population with a “direct migration background“: 1 385 000 (16.6%) – born abroad and/or of foreign nationality Austria‘s population by nationalities numberIn % Austria7 477 17889.74 Former Yugoslavia (excl. Slovenia) 292 1693.51 Germany124 0881.49 Turkey109 7161.32 others328 7793.95 total8 331 930

4. Current situation Share of pupils with a mother tongue other than German School year 2006/ 07ViennaAustria Primary schools (incl. pre-school)48 %20.3 % Secondary general schools57.1%18.7 % Special school (SEN)47 %26.5 % Pre-vocational year56.8%20.4 % General compulsory schools total51.2 %19.8% Secondary academic – lower cycle25.7 %12.3 % Secondary academic – upper cycle23.7 %10.8 % Secondary academic schools total24.9 %11.7 % Technical and vocational schools total28.5 %9.7 %

5. Country Background Report Data-situation: -Statistics until 1993 mainly on nationality -Since 1993 also first language (other than German) along provinces and school-types -Since 2003 development of educational register: not yet fully accessible for research -Also there date of immigration/entrance in the Austrian school-system missing -country of birth of parents missing No evaluation and no criteria for good practice

6. Migration research Seen by policy-makers as potentially harmful Not well institutionalized & underfunded Research on migrant education only recently intensified Founding of federal institute of development and innovation and research in education 2008 Best quality data from PISA 2000, 2003, 2006 and PIRLS 2006 Sampling biggest problem for survey-research

7. Some interesting facts PISA results show that students with migr.backgr. lag behind approx. 2 years After accounting SES still 1 year 2nd gen much worse results than 1st gen => diff. composition not only regarding countries of origin but also within country of origins (SES)

8. Legal Framework Language support -> in the language of instruction -> in their first language Intercultural Learning as general principle  BUT very loose definition and no sanctions, i.e. wide descretion for school-leaders and teachers, at the same time  almost no leadership in this field  no compulsory teacher education and in- service-training in this field

9. Remarks concerning the report Averages can be misleading Disaggregation of groups very important e.g. 2 biggest groups and 2 high-achieving and 2 low- achieving groups At the same time: Danger of categorisation along nationality/ethnicity: boundary-drawing processes intensifies (Internat. org. can play important role in public discourse!) Understanding SES & compositional effects Understanding boundary-drawing processes and folk- taxonomy/pecking order