1. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Why quality in education matters And what it takes to improve it Washington, April 28, 2010 Andreas Schleicher Education Policy Advisor of the OECD Secretary-General

2. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters 1.Know w hy you are looking The yardstick for success is no longer just improvement by national standards… …but the best performing education systems globally 2.Know what you are looking for The kind of ‘human capital’ that makes a difference for individuals and nations 3.How do we recognise it when we found it? The link between skills, and economic and social outcomes 4.Policy implications Understanding what contributes to the success of education systems and improving performance.

3. Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate A world of change – higher education Graduate supply Cost per student

4. Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate A world of change – higher education United States Finland Graduate supply Cost per student

5. Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate A world of change – higher education Australia Finland United Kingdom

6. Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate A world of change – higher education

7. Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate A world of change – higher education

8. Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate A world of change – higher education

9. Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate A world of change – higher education

10. Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate A world of change – higher education

11. Expenditure per student at tertiary level (USD) Tertiary-type A graduation rate A world of change – higher education United States Australia Finland

12. Education Indicators Programme 2009 edition of Education at a Glance Components of the private net present value for a male with higher education Net present value in USD equivalent 35K$ 56K$ 367K$ 105K$ 27K$ 26K$ 170K$

13. Education Indicators Programme 2009 edition of Education at a Glance Public cost and benefits for a male obtaining post-secondary education Public benefits Public costs Net present value, USD equivalent (numbers in orange show negative values) Net present value, USD equivalent (numbers in orange show negative values) USD equivalent

14. Andreas Schleicher 16 September 2009 Impact of international Assessments Know what you are looking for The kind of human capital that makes a difference for people and nations

15. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Latin America then… Hanushek 2009 GDP/pop 1960 Years schooling Asia 18914 Sub-Saharan Africa 23043.3 MENA 25992.7 Latin America 41524.7 Europe 74697.4 Orig. OECD 112529.5

16. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters GDP/pop 1960 Years schooling Asia 18914 Sub-Saharan Africa 23043.3 MENA 25992.7 Latin America 41524.7 Europe 74697.4 Orig. OECD 112529.5 Latin America then and now… GDP/pop 1960 Years schooling Growth 1960-2000 GDP/pop 2000 Asia 189144.513571 Sub-Saharan Africa 23043.31.43792 MENA 25992.7 8415 Latin America 41524.71.88063 Europe 74697.42.921752 Orig. OECD 112529.52.126147 Hanushek 2009

17. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Latin America then and now… Why quality is the key Hanushek 2009 GDP/pop 1960 Years schooling Growth 1960-2000 GDP/pop 2000 PISA test score Asia 189144.513571480 Sub-Saharan Africa 23043.31.43792360 MENA 25992.7 8415412 Latin America 41524.71.88063388 Europe 74697.42.921752492 Orig. OECD 112529.52.126147500

18. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Coverage of world economy 77%81% 83% 85%86%87% OECD’s PISA assessment of the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds

19. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Average performance of 15-year-olds in science – extrapolate and apply High science performance Low science performance … 18 countries perform below this line Not just about poor kids in poor neighborhoods but about many kids in many neighborhoods U.S. city of over 1m U.S. small town (3-15k) U.S. suburban (15-100k) Poland 2000

20. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Large proportion of top performers Top and bottom performers in science 20 Large prop. of poor perf. These students often confuse key features of a scientific investigation, apply incorrect information, mix personal beliefs with facts in support of a position… 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…

21. Andreas Schleicher 16 September 2009 Impact of international Assessments How do we know that we found it? To what extent knowledge and skills matter for the success of individuals and economies

22. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Increased likelihood of postsec. particip. at age 19/21 associated with PISA reading proficiency at age 15 (Canada) after accounting for school engagement, gender, mother tongue, place of residence, parental, education and family income (reference group PISA Level 1) Odds ratio College entry School marks at age 15 PISA performance at age 15

23. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Modelling the impact r Programmes to improve cognitive skills through schools take time to implement and to have their impact on students. Assume that it will take 20 years to implement reform r The impact of improved skills will not be realised until the students with greater skills move into the labour force Assume that improved PISA performance will result in improved skill-based of 2.5% of the labour-force each year r The economy will respond over time as new technologies are developed and implemented, making use of the new higher skills Estimate the total gains over the lifetime of the generation born this year.

24. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters High science performance Low science performance México (410) Average performance of 15-year-olds in science – extrapolate and apply Imagine…...we could improve every system by 25 PISA points over the next 20 years (which is what Poland did in the last 6 years)

25. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Relationship between test performance and economic outcomes Annual improved GDP from raising performance by 25 PISA points Percent addition to GDP

26. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Increase average performance by 25 PISA points (Total 115 trillion $) bn$

27. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters High science performance Low science performance México (410) Average performance of 15-year-olds in science – extrapolate and apply Imagine…...we could ensure that every child reaches at least the PISA baseline performance level 2

28. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Raise everyone to minimum of 400 PISA points bn$

29. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Raise everyone to minimum of 400 PISA points % currrent GDP

30. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Some conclusions r The higher economic outcomes that improved student performance entails dwarf the dimensions of economic cycles r Even if the estimated impacts of skills were twice as large as the true underlying causal impact on growth, the resulting present value of successful school reform still far exceeds any conceivable costs of improvement.

31. Andreas Schleicher 16 September 2009 Impact of international Assessments Implications Understanding what contributes to the success of education systems and improving performance

32. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Money matters - but other things do too Question: If better education results in more money, Does more money result in better education?

33. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Spending choices on secondary schools Contribution of various factors to upper secondary teacher compensation costs per student as a percentage of GDP per capita (2004) Percentage points

34. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters High ambitions and universal standards Rigor, focus and coherence Great systems attract great teachers and provide access to best practice and quality professional development

35. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Challenge and support Weak support Strong support Low challenge High challenge Strong performance Systemic improvement Poor performance Improvements idiosyncratic Conflict Demoralisation Poor performance Stagnation

36. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Human capital International Best Practice Principals who are trained, empowered, accountable and provide instructional leadership Attracting, recruiting and providing excellent training for prospective teachers from the top third of the graduate distribution Incentives, rules and funding encourage a fair distribution of teaching talent The past Principals who manage ‘a building’, who have little training and preparation and are accountable but not empowered Attracting and recruiting teachers from the bottom third of the graduate distribution and offering training which does not relate to real classrooms The best teachers are in the most advantaged communities

37. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Human capital (cont…) International Best Practice Expectations of teachers are clear; consistent quality, strong professional ethic and excellent professional development focused on classroom practice Teachers and the system expect every child to succeed and intervene preventatively to ensure this The past Seniority and tenure matter more than performance; patchy professional development; wide variation in quality Wide achievement gaps, just beginning to narrow but systemic and professional barriers to transformation remain in place

38. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters High ambitions Access to best practice and quality professional development Accountability and intervention in inverse proportion to success Devolved responsibility, the school as the centre of action

39. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters PISA score in science School autonomy, standards-based examinations and science performance School autonomy in selecting teachers for hire

40. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Public and private schools Private schools perform better Public schools perform better % Score point difference

41. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Pooled international dataset, effects of selected school/system factors on science performance after accounting for all other factors in the model OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies from Tomorrow’s World, Table 6.1a 20 Schools practicing ability grouping (gross and net) Academically selective schools (gross and net) but no system-wide effect School results posted publicly (gross and net) One additional hour of science learning at school (gross and net) One additional hour of out- of-school lessons (gross and net) One additional hour of self-study or homework (gross and net) School activities to promote science learning (gross and net) Schools with greater autonomy (resources) (gross and net) Each additional 10% of public funding (gross only) Schools with more competing schools (gross only) School principal’s perception that lack of qualified teachers hinders instruction (gross only) School principal’s positive evaluation of quality of educational materials (gross only) Measured effect Effect after accounting for the socio-economic background of students, schools and countries

42. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Strong ambitions Access to best practice and quality professional development Accountability Devolved responsibility, the school as the centre of action Integrated educational opportunities From prescribed forms of teaching and assessment towards personalised learning

43. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Durchschnittliche Schülerleistungen im Bereich Mathematik Low average performance Large socio-economic disparities High average performance Large socio-economic disparities Low average performance High social equity High average performance High social equity Strong socio- economic impact on student performance Socially equitable distribution of learning opportunities High science performance Low science performance Early selection and institutional differentiation High degree of stratification Low degree of stratification

44. Andreas Schleicher 16 September 2009 Impact of international Assessments Principled Strategic partnership Negotiated Pragmatic. Top-down Antagonistic. Leading Evidence-driven Achieving high reliability and innovation. Enabling Incentivising. World class performance. Continuous learning and innovation. Good  Great Accommodating Evidence-based Adopting best. practice Regulating. Capacity-building Transparency. Spreading best practice Implementing Accepting evidence Adopting minimum standards Prescribing. Justifying Tackling underperformance Adequate  GoodPoor  Adequate Main focus of assessment Role of government Role of professions Nature of relationship between government and professions Phases of development Main outcomes Improvement in outcomes Reduction of public anxiety. Steady improvement Growing public satisfaction. Consistent quality Public engagement and co-production. Getting the order right

45. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters Paradigm shifts The old bureaucratic systemThe modern enabling system Hit and miss  Universal high standards Uniformity  Embracing diversity Provision  Outcomes Bureaucratic look-up  Devolved – look outwards Talk equity  Deliver equity Prescription  Informed profession Conformity  Ingenious Curriculum-centred  Learner-centred Interactive  Participative Individualised  Community-centred Delivered wisdom  User-generated wisdom Management  Leadership Public vs private  Public with private Culture as obstacle  Culture as capital

46. Andreas Schleicher Washington, April 28, 2010 Why quality in education matters www.oecd.org; www.pisa.oecd.org –All national and international publications –The complete micro-level database email: pisa@oecd.org Andreas.Schleicher@OECD.org …and remember: Without data, you are just another person with an opinion