Home >Education >ISTP 2014 - Equity, Excellence and Inclusiveness in Education

ISTP 2014 - Equity, Excellence and Inclusiveness in Education

Date post:19-Aug-2014
Category:
View:8,760 times
Download:0 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
Presentation for the 2014 International Summit on the Teaching Profession, by Andreas Schleicher, Acting Director for the Directorate of Education and Skills, and Special Advisor on Education Policy to the Secretary-General, OECD
Transcript:
  • ISTP 2014 Equity, excellence and inclusiveness in education Wellington, 28 March Andreas Schleicher
  • 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Being Employed High wages Good to excellent health Participation in volunteer activities High levels of political efficacy High levels of trust 2 Skills transform lives and drive economies Odds ratio Increased likelihood of positive outcomes for adults with higher literacy skills (scoring at PIAAC Level 4/5 compared with those scoring at Level 1 or below)
  • 33 Inequality in skills relates to how wealth is shared in nations
  • 44 Australia Austria Canada Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Ireland Italy Japan KoreaNetherlands Norway Poland Slovak Republic Spain Sweden United States Flanders (Belgium) England/N. Ireland (UK) 0.2 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.3 0.32 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.4 1.41.451.51.551.61.651.7 Literacy skills inequality (9th/1st decile) Income inequality (Gini coefficient) Low income inequality Low skills inequality High income inequality Low skills inequality High income inequality High skills inequality Low income inequality High skills inequality Average Average Inequality in skills relates to how wealth is shared in nations
  • 55 The false choice between equity and excellence The false choice between equity and excellence Some evidence from PISA 2012
  • Singapore Hong Kong-ChinaChinese Taipei Korea Macao-China Japan Liechtenstein Switzerland Netherlands Estonia Finland Canada Poland Belgium Germany Viet Nam Austria Australia IrelandSlovenia DenmarkNew Zealand Czech Republic France United Kingdom Iceland LatviaLuxembourg Norway Portugal ItalySpain Russian Fed.Slovak Republic United States LithuaniaSwedenHungary Croatia Israel Greece SerbiaTurkey Romania Bulgaria U.A.E. Kazakhstan Thailand Chile Malaysia Mexico 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530 540 550 560 570 580 Mean score High mathematics performance Low mathematics performance Shanghai-China performs above this line (613) 12 countries perform below this line Average performance of 15-year-olds in Mathematics Fig I.2.13 Source: PISA 2012
  • Socially equitable distribution of learning opportunities High mathematics performance Low mathematics performance Average performance of 15-year-olds in mathematics Strong socio-economic impact on student performance Singapore Hong Kong-ChinaChinese Taipei Korea Macao-China Japan Liechtenstein Switzerland Netherlands Estonia Finland Canada Poland Belgium Germany Viet Nam Austria Australia IrelandSlovenia DenmarkNew Zealand Czech Republic France United Kingdom Iceland LatviaLuxembourg Norway Portugal ItalySpain Russian Fed.Slovak Republic United States LithuaniaSwedenHungary Croatia Israel Greece SerbiaTurkey Romania Bulgaria U.A.E. Kazakhstan Thailand Chile Malaysia Mexico
  • AustraliaAustria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Singapore Hong Kong-ChinaChinese Taipei Macao-China Liechtenstein Viet Nam Latvia Russian Fed. Lithuania Croatia Serbia Romania Bulgaria United Arab Emirates Kazakhstan Thailand Malaysia 02468101214161820222426 2012 Socially equitable distribution of learning opportunities Strong socio-economic impact on student performance
  • AustraliaAustria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Australia Austria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US 2012 Socially equitable distribution of learning opportunities Strong socio-economic impact on student performance
  • AustraliaAustria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Australia Austria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US
  • AustraliaAustria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Australia Austria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Singapore Shanghai Singapore 2003 - 2012
  • 1515 Fostering resilience The country where students go to class matters more than what social class students come from
  • 1616 PISA mathematics performance by decile of social background 300325350375400425450475500525550575600625650675 Mexico Chile Greece Norway Sweden Iceland Israel Italy UnitedStates Spain Denmark Luxembourg Australia Ireland UnitedKingdom Hungary Canada Finland Austria Turkey Liechtenstein CzechRepublic Estonia Portugal Slovenia SlovakRepublic NewZealand Germany Netherlands France Switzerland Poland Belgium Japan Macao-China HongKong-China Korea Singapore ChineseTaipei Shanghai-China Source: PISA 2012
  • 420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530 540 550 560 570 580 2003 2003 2003 2012 2012 2012 18 Dont close achievement gaps the wrong way Performance differences between top and bottom quarter of socio-economic distribution Quarter of most disadvantaged students PISAperformance(mathematics) Quarter of most privileged students Source: PISA 2012
  • 1919 The rising demand for advanced skills -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 % Evolution of employment in occupational groups defined by PIAAC problem-solving skills Employment of workers with advanced problem-solving skills Employment of workers with poor problem-solving skillsEmployment of workers with medium-low problem-solving skills (PIAAC) Source:PIAAC 2011
  • 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Shanghai-China Singapore ChineseTaipei HongKong-China Korea Liechtenstein Macao-China Japan Switzerland Belgium Netherlands Germany Poland Canada Finland NewZealand Australia Estonia Austria Slovenia VietNam France CzechRepublic OECDaverage UnitedKingdom Luxembourg Iceland SlovakRepublic Ireland Portugal Denmark Italy Norway Israel Hungary UnitedStates Lithuania Sweden Spain Latvia RussianFederation Croatia Turkey Serbia Bulgaria Greece UnitedArabEmirates Romania Thailand Qatar Chile Uruguay Malaysia Montenegro Kazakhstan Albania Tunisia Brazil Mexico Peru CostaRica Jordan Colombia Indonesia Argentina % Building excellence Percentage of top performers in mathematics20 Tab I.2.1a Across OECD, 13% of students are top performers (Level 5 or 6). They can develop and work with models for complex situations, and work strategically with advanced thinking and reasoning skills Source: PISA 2012
  • 2121Lessonsfromhighperformers Low impact on outcomes High impact on outcomes Low feasibility High feasibility Money pits Must haves Low hanging fruits Quick wins Excellence, Equity and Inclusiveness
  • 2222Lessonsfromhighperformers Low impact on outcomes High impact on outcomes Low feasibility High feasibility Money pits Must haves Low hanging fruits Quick wins Attract, nurture and retain high quality teachers for the schools in greatest need Allocate resources equitably Make high quality early- childhood education accessible Encourage autonomy in the context of accountability Avoid segregation and stratification Use assessment and evaluation to identify and support struggling students and schools
  • 2323 Align the resources with the challenges Countering disadvantage without rewarding underperformance
  • 2626 Align the resources with the challenges Hong Kong-China Brazil Uruguay Croatia Latvia Chinese Taipei Thailand Bulgaria Jordan Macao-China UAE Argentina Indonesia Kazakhstan Peru Costa Rica Montenegro Tunisia Qatar Singapore Colombia Malaysia Serbia Romania Viet Nam Shanghai-China USA Poland New Zealand Greece UK Estonia Finland Slovak Rep. Luxembourg Germany AustriaFrance Japan Turkey Sweden Hungary Australia Israel Canada Ireland Chile Belgium SpainDenmark Switzerlan
Popular Tags:

Click here to load reader

Embed Size (px)
Recommended