Strong'performers'and'successful' reformers'in… · Strong'performers'and'successful'...

1 1 IBAEM Conference

Strong'performers'and'successful'reformers'in'educa3on'

IBAEM, 17 October 2014, Rome

'Andreas(Schleicher(

''

2 2 21st century skills

The'dilemma'for'educators'

The'kinds'of'things'that'are'easy'to'teach'and'test'are'also'easy'to'digi3se,'

automate'and'outsource'

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2006 2009

Routine manual Nonroutine manual Routine cognitive Nonroutine analytic Nonroutine interpersonal

Mean task input in percentiles of 1960 task distribution

3 The modern world no longer rewards people just for what they know, but for what they can do with what they know

Source: Autor, David H. and Brendan M. Price. 2013. "The Changing Task Composition of the US Labor Market: An Update of Autor, Levy, and Murnane (2003)." MIT Mimeograph, June.

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 4 4 Most teachers value 21st century pedagogies…

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that:

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Students learn best by finding solutions to problems on their own

Thinking and reasoning processes are more important than specific curriculum content

Students should be allowed to think of solutions to practical problems themselves before the teacher shows them how they

are solved

My role as a teacher is to facilitate students' own inquiry

Average Average

0 20 40 60 80 100

Students work on projects that require at least one week to complete

Students use ICT for projects or class work

Give different work to the students who have difficulties learning and/or to those who can advance faster

Students work in small groups to come up with a joint solution to a problem or task

Let students practice similar tasks until teacher knows that every student has understood the subject matter

Refer to a problem from everyday life or work to demonstrate why new knowledge is useful

Check students' exercise books or homework

Present a summary of recently learned content

Italy Average

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 5 5 …but teaching practices do not always reflect that

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who report using the following teaching practices "frequently" or "in all or nearly all lessons"

6 6 Schooling outcomes

Assessing'equity'and'excellence'

7 PISA in brief

•  Over'half'a'million'students…'–  represen3ng'28'million'15CyearColds'in'65'countries/economies'

…'took'an'interna3onally'agreed'2Chour'test…'–  Goes'beyond'tes3ng'whether'students'can''reproduce'what'they'were'taught…'

…'to'assess'students’'capacity'to'extrapolate'from'what'they'know'and'crea3vely'apply'their'knowledge'in'novel'situa3ons'

–  Mathema3cs,'reading,(science,(problem4solving,(collabora6ve((skills,(global(competencies(

–  Total'of'390'minutes'of'assessment'material'

…'and'responded'to'ques3ons'on…'–  their'personal'background,'their'schools''and'their'engagement'with'learning'and'school'

•  Parents,'principals'and'system'leaders'provided'data'on…'–  school'policies,'prac3ces,'resources''and'ins3tu3onal'factors'that'help'explain'performance'differences'.'

'

8 PISA in brief

•  Key'principles'–  ‘Crowd'sourcing’'and'collabora3on'

•  PISA'draws'together'leading'exper3se'and'ins3tu3ons'from'par3cipa3ng'countries'to'develop'instruments'and'methodologies…'

…'guided'by'governments'on'the'basis'of'shared'policy'interests'

–  CrossCna3onal'relevance'and'transferability'of'policy'experiences'•  Emphasis'on'validity'across'cultures,'languages'and'systems'•  Frameworks'built'on'wellCstructured'conceptual'understanding'of'academic'disciplines'and'contextual'factors'

–  Triangula3on'across'different'stakeholder'perspec3ves'•  Systema3c'integra3on'of'insights'from'students,'parents,''school'principals'and'systemCleaders'

–  Advanced'methods'with'different'grain'sizes'•  A'range'of'methods'to'adequately'measure'constructs'with'different'grain'sizes'

to'serve'different'decisionCmaking'needs''•  Produc3ve'feedback,'at'appropriate'levels'of'detail,'to'fuel'improvement'at'

every'level'of'the'system'.'

Singapore

Hong Kong-China Chinese Taipei Korea

Macao-China Japan Liechtenstein Switzerland

Netherlands Estonia Finland Canada Poland Belgium Germany Viet Nam

Austria Australia Ireland Slovenia Denmark New Zealand

Czech Republic France United Kingdom Iceland Latvia Luxembourg Norway

Portugal Italy Spain Russian Fed. Slovak Republic United States Lithuania Sweden Hungary Croatia

Israel

Greece Serbia Turkey

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

Turchia(

Svezia(

Grecia(

Austria(

Olanda(Polonia(

Repubblica(Ceca(

Islanda(

Portogallo(

Francia(

Nuova(Zelanda(

Islanda(

Francia(

Ungheria(Ungheria(

Ungheria(

Grecia(Israele(

Tailandia(

Perù(Singapore(

Brasile(Switzerland(

Singapore







Israel




410

420

430

440

450

460

470

480

490

500

510

520

530

540

550

560

570

580 Mean score



…"Shanghai)China"performs"above"this"line"(613)"

"…"12"countries"perform"below"this"line"


Mathematics Fig I.2.13

Socially equitable distribution of learning

opportunities




mathematics

Strong socio-economic impact on student

performance

Singapore







Israel




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

Hong Kong-China Chinese Taipei

Macao-China Liechtenstein

Viet Nam

Latvia

Russian Fed. Lithuania

Croatia

Serbia Romania

Bulgaria United Arab Emirates

Kazakhstan Thailand

Malaysia

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26

2012


opportunities


performance

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

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


opportunities


performance

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


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 Germany, Turkey and Mexico improved both their mathematics performance and equity levels

Brazil, Italy, Macao-China, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Thailand and Tunisia improved their mathematics performance (no change in equity)

Liechtenstein, Norway, the United States and Switzerland improved their equity levels (no change in performance)

Chile'2001'

Turkey'2003'

17 17 Fostering resilience

The'country'where'students'go'to'class'maXers'more'than'what'social'class'students'come'from'

18 18 Resilience in education PISA performance by decile of social background

300

325

350

375

400

425

450

475

500

525

550

575

600

625

650

675

Mex

ico

Chi

le

Gre

ece

Nor

way

Sw

eden

Ic

elan

d Is

rael

Ita

ly

Uni

ted

Stat

es

Spai

n D

enm

ark

Luxe

mbo

urg

Aus

tral

ia

Irela

nd

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

H

unga

ry

Can

ada

Finl

and

Aus

tria

Tu

rkey

Li

echt

enst

ein

Cze

ch R

epub

lic

Esto

nia

Port

ugal

Sl

oven

ia

Slov

ak R

epub

lic

New

Zea

land

G

erm

any

Net

herla

nds

Fran

ce

Switz

erla

nd

Pola

nd

Bel

gium

Ja

pan

Mac

ao-C

hina

H

ong

Kon

g-C

hina

K

orea

Si

ngap

ore

Chi

nese

Tai

pei

Shan

ghai

-Chi

na

Source: PISA 2012

19 19 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s

Catching(up(with(the(top4performers(

Low(impact(on(outcomes(

High(impact(on(outcomes(

Low(feasibility( High(feasibility(

Money(pits(

Must(haves(

Low(hanging(fruits(

Quick(wins(

20 20 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money(pits(

Must(haves(

Low(hanging(fruits(

Quick(wins(

Commitment(to(universal(achievement(

Gateways,(instruc6onal(systems(

Capacity((at(point(of(delivery(

Incen6ve(structures(and(accountability(

Resources((where(they(yield(most(

A(learning(system(Coherence(

21 21 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money(pits(

Must(haves(

Low(hanging(fruits(

Quick(wins(







❒  A(commitment(to(educa6on(and(the(belief(that(competencies(can(be(learned(and(therefore(all(children(can(achieve(!  Universal(educa6onal(standards(and(personaliza6on(as(

the(approach(to(heterogeneity(in(the(student(body…(… (as(opposed(to(a(belief(that(students(have(different(

des6na6ons(to(be(met(with(different(expecta6ons,(and(selec6on/stra6fica6on(as(the(approach(to(heterogeneity(

!  Clear(ar6cula6on(who(is(responsible(for(ensuring(student(success(and(to(whom(

United States

Poland

Hong Kong-China

Brazil

New Zealand

Greece

Uruguay

United Kingdom

Estonia Finland

Albania

Croatia

Latvia

Slovak Republic Luxembourg

Germany

Lithuania

Austria

Czech Republic

Chinese Taipei

France Thailand

Japan

Turkey Sweden

Hungary Australia

Israel

Canada

Ireland Bulgaria

Jordan

Chile

Macao-China

U.A.E.

Belgium Netherlands

Spain

Argentina

Indonesia

Denmark

Kazakhstan

Peru

Costa Rica

Switzerland

Montenegro

Tunisia

Iceland

Slovenia

Qatar

Singapore

Portugal

Norway

Colombia

Malaysia

Mexico

Liechtenstein

Korea

Serbia

Russian Fed.

Romania

Viet Nam

Italy

Shanghai-China

R² = 0.36

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

-0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Mea

n m

athe

mat

ics

perf

orm

ance

Mean index of mathematics self-efficacy

OEC

D a

vera

ge

Countries where students have stronger beliefs in their abilities perform better in mathematics 22 Fig III.4.5

Perceived self-responsibility for failure in mathematics

Percentage of students who reported "agree" or "strongly agree" with the following statements:

0 20 40 60 80

I’m not very good at solving mathematics problems

My teacher did not explain the concepts well this week

This week I made bad guesses on the quiz

Sometimes the course material is too hard

The teacher did not get students interested in the material

Sometimes I am just unlucky

%

Italy Japan OECD average

Fig III.3.6 23

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

Mal

aysi

a A

lban

ia

Indo

nesi

a K

azak

hsta

n R

oman

ia

Por

tuga

l P

eru

Pol

and

Viet

Nam

Tu

rkey

S

lova

k R

epub

lic

Thai

land

C

olom

bia

Mon

tene

gro

Spa

in

Sha

ngha

i-Chi

na

Mex

ico

Bul

garia

Tu

nisi

a A

rgen

tina

Kor

ea

Mac

ao-C

hina

S

erbi

a S

love

nia

Italy

C

hile

H

unga

ry

Bra

zil

Chi

nese

Tai

pei

Gre

ece

Rus

sian

Fed

. U

nite

d S

tate

s Ire

land

U

rugu

ay

Sin

gapo

re

Cos

ta R

ica

Japa

n U

.A.E

. Jo

rdan

C

roat

ia

Can

ada

Lith

uani

a Is

rael

O

EC

D a

vera

ge

Est

onia

La

tvia

S

wed

en

Luxe

mbo

urg

Nor

way

C

zech

Rep

ublic

D

enm

ark

Qat

ar

Hon

g K

ong-

Chi

na

Aus

tria

New

Zea

land

U

nite

d K

ingd

om

Aus

tralia

N

ethe

rland

s B

elgi

um

Fran

ce

Sw

itzer

land

Li

echt

enst

ein

Finl

and

Ger

man

y Ic

elan

d

Mea

n in

dex

diffe

renc

e (b

oys-

girls

)

Difference in the mean index

Gender gap adjusted for differences in mathematics performance between boys and girls Gender gap

Boys tend to have greater beliefs in their mathematics abilities than girls 24 Fig III.7.7

B

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

Col

ombi

a C

osta

Ric

a P

eru

Isra

el

Luxe

mbo

urg

Chi

le

Tuni

sia

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Li

echt

enst

ein

Italy

K

orea

S

pain

A

rgen

tina

Bra

zil

Por

tuga

l G

reec

e Ja

pan

Aus

tria

Uru

guay

M

exic

o H

ong

Kon

g-C

hina

B

ulga

ria

Turk

ey

Indo

nesi

a H

unga

ry

Viet

Nam

U

nite

d S

tate

s R

oman

ia

U.A

.E.

Chi

nese

Tai

pei

Can

ada

Irela

nd

Bel

gium

K

azak

hsta

n C

zech

Rep

ublic

O

EC

D a

vera

ge

Cro

atia

Fr

ance

S

hang

hai-C

hina

M

onte

negr

o P

olan

d S

erbi

a M

alay

sia

Est

onia

Q

atar

M

acao

-Chi

na

Net

herla

nds

New

Zea

land

N

orw

ay

Lith

uani

a S

love

nia

Den

mar

k Jo

rdan

S

witz

erla

nd

Aus

tralia

G

erm

any

Latv

ia

Rus

sian

Fed

. S

wed

en

Sin

gapo

re

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

Th

aila

nd

Finl

and

Icel

and

Scor

e-po

int d

iffer

ence

(boy

s-gi

rls)

Gender gap among the highest-achieving students (90th percentile)

Gender gap adjusted for differences in mathematics self-efficacy between boys and girls Gender gap

Greater self-efficacy among girls could shrink the gender gap in mathematics performance, particularly among the highest-performing students 25 Fig III.7.12

B

Boys(do(beMer(

Girls(do(beMer(

Percentage of girls and boys who intend to take additional mathematics, rather than language, courses after they leave school

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Turk

ey

Jord

an *

C

osta

Ric

a *

Thai

land

K

azak

hsta

n *

Icel

and

Sha

ngha

i-Chi

na *

Vi

et N

am

Alb

ania

*

Uni

ted

Ara

b E

mira

tes

* Q

atar

M

alay

sia

* N

orw

ay

Isra

el

Cyp

rus

Indo

nesi

a *

Por

tuga

l *

Col

ombi

a Ja

pan

Net

herla

nds

Cro

atia

La

tvia

U

rugu

ay

Arg

entin

a D

enm

ark

Per

u M

exic

o Tu

nisi

a E

ston

ia

Chi

le

Liec

hten

stei

n M

acao

-Chi

na

Pol

and

Luxe

mbo

urg

Fran

ce

Spa

in

Italy

S

wed

en

Bel

gium

U

nite

d S

tate

s C

zech

Rep

ublic

C

hine

se T

aipe

i S

inga

pore

O

EC

D a

vera

ge

Slo

veni

a C

anad

a G

reec

e Li

thua

nia

Bul

garia

S

witz

erla

nd

Finl

and

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

S

lova

k R

epub

lic

Rom

ania

R

ussi

an F

eder

atio

n A

ustri

a M

onte

negr

o B

razi

l Ire

land

G

erm

any

Hon

g K

ong-

Chi

na

Aus

tralia

N

ew Z

eala

nd

Ser

bia

Kor

ea

Hun

gary

Girls Boys %

27

27

27 A continuum of support

Make'learning'central,'encourage'engagement'and'responsibility'

Be'acutely'sensi3ve'to'individual'differences'

Provide'con3nual'assessment'with'forma3ve'feedback'

Be'demanding'for'every'student'

Ensure'that'students'feel'valued'and'included'and'learning'is'collabora3ve'

28 28 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money(pits(

Must(haves(

Low(hanging(fruits(

Quick(wins(







❒  Clear(ambi6ous(goals(that(are(shared(across(the(system(and(aligned(with(high(stakes(gateways(and(instruc6onal(systems(!  Well(established(delivery(chain(through(which(

curricular(goals(translate(into(instruc6onal(systems,(instruc6onal(prac6ces(and(student(learning((intended,(implemented(and(achieved)(

!  High(level(of(metacogni6ve(content(of(instruc6on(…(

29 29 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money(pits(

Must(haves(

Low(hanging(fruits(

Quick(wins(







❒  Capacity(at(the(point(of(delivery(!  AMrac6ng,(developing(and(retaining(high(quality(

teachers(and(school(leaders(and(a(work(organisa6on(in(which(they(can(use(their(poten6al(

!  Instruc6onal((leadership(and(human(resource(management(in(schools(

!  Keeping(teaching(an(aMrac6ve(profession(!  System4wide(career(development(…(

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Luxe

mbo

urg

Jord

an

Thai

land

Tu

rkey

S

hang

hai-C

hina

Is

rael

C

olom

bia

Per

u C

hile

N

ethe

rland

s M

exic

o G

erm

any

Viet

Nam

R

ussi

an F

ed.

Uru

guay

N

orw

ay

Kaz

akhs

tan

Indo

nesi

a B

elgi

um

Italy

M

alay

sia

Aus

tralia

B

razi

l Ic

elan

d U

.A.E

. S

inga

pore

N

ew Z

eala

nd

Kor

ea

Sw

itzer

land

E

ston

ia

Mac

ao-C

hina

C

osta

Ric

a O

EC

D a

vera

ge

Sw

eden

A

rgen

tina

Tuni

sia

Aus

tria

Qat

ar

Irela

nd

Chi

nese

Tai

pei

Fran

ce

Den

mar

k U

nite

d K

ingd

om

Hon

g K

ong-

Chi

na

Alb

ania

Ja

pan

Can

ada

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

La

tvia

G

reec

e U

nite

d S

tate

s C

zech

Rep

ublic

C

roat

ia

Finl

and

Mon

tene

gro

Rom

ania

H

unga

ry

Lith

uani

a S

love

nia

Spa

in

Ser

bia

Por

tuga

l B

ulga

ria

Pol

and

Mea

n in

dex

Mean index Top quarter of this index Bottom quarter of this index

Teacher shortage Fig IV.3.5

31 31 Adequate resources to address disadvantage

Disadvantaged schools reported more teacher shortage

Advantaged schools reported more teacher shortage

-0.5

-0.3

-0.1

0.1

0.3

0.5

0.7

0.9

1.1

1.3

1.5

Kor

ea

Esto

nia

Isra

el

Latv

ia

Slov

enia

Ita

ly

Pola

nd

Sing

apor

e A

rgen

tina

Net

herla

nds

Port

ugal

C

olom

bia

Fran

ce

Finl

and

Tuni

sia

Mac

ao-C

hina

Sp

ain

Gre

ece

Switz

erla

nd

Nor

way

R

ussi

an F

ed.

Japa

n A

ustr

ia

Mon

tene

gro

Cro

atia

C

anad

a O

ECD

ave

rage

G

erm

any

Den

mar

k H

unga

ry

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

Lu

xem

bour

g H

ong

Kon

g-C

hina

B

elgi

um

Icel

and

Viet

Nam

Ire

land

U

nite

d St

ates

C

hile

C

zech

Rep

ublic

Se

rbia

Tu

rkey

M

exic

o In

done

sia

Uru

guay

Sh

angh

ai-C

hina

Sl

ovak

Rep

ublic

Sw

eden

B

razi

l N

ew Z

eala

nd

Aus

tral

ia

Chi

nese

Tai

pei

Mea

n in

dex

diffe

renc

e

Difference(between(socio4economically(disadvantaged(and(socio4economically(advantaged(schools(

A'shortage'of'qualified'teachers'is'more'of'concern''in'disadvantaged'schools'

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 32 32 Teachers' perceptions of the value of teaching

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that teaching profession is a valued profession in society

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Mal

aysi

a

Sin

gapo

re

Kor

ea

Abu

Dha

bi (U

AE

)

Finl

and

Mex

ico

Alb

erta

(Can

ada)

Flan

ders

(Bel

gium

)

Net

herla

nds

Aus

tralia

Eng

land

(UK

)

Rom

ania

Isra

el

Uni

ted

Sta

tes

Chi

le

Aver

age

Nor

way

Japa

n

Latv

ia

Ser

bia

Bul

garia

Den

mar

k

Pol

and

Icel

and

Est

onia

Bra

zil

Italy

Cze

ch R

epub

lic

Por

tuga

l

Cro

atia

Spa

in

Sw

eden

Fran

ce

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Per

cent

age

of te

ache

rs

Above-average performers in PISA

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 33 33

Countries where teachers believe their profession is valued show higher levels of student achievement

Relationship between lower secondary teachers' views on the value of their profession in society and the country’s share of top mathematics performers in PISA 2012

Australia

Brazil

Bulgaria Chile

Croatia

Czech Republic

Denmark

Estonia Finland France

Iceland Israel

Italy

Japan

Korea

Latvia

Mexico

Netherlands

Norway

Poland

Portugal

Romania Serbia

Singapore

Slovak Republic

Spain Sweden

Alberta (Canada)

England (UK)

Flanders (Belgium)

United States

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Shar

e of

mat

hem

atic

s to

p pe

rfor

mer

s

Percentage of teachers who agree that teaching is valued in society

R2 = 0.24 r= 0.49

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100 D

iscu

ss in

divi

dual

stu

dent

s

Sha

re re

sour

ces

Team

con

fere

nces

Col

labo

rate

for c

omm

on

stan

dard

s

Team

teac

hing

Col

labo

rativ

e P

D

Join

t act

iviti

es

Cla

ssro

om o

bser

vatio

ns

Perc

enta

ge o

f tea

cher

s

Average

Professional collaboration

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who report doing the following activities at least once per month

Teacher co-operation 34

Exchange and co-ordination

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 35 35 Drivers of job satisfaction

The more frequently that tea

chers report participating in

collaborative practices wit

h their colleagues,

the higher their level of se

lf-efficacy.

The same is true

for job satisfaction.

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 36 36 Teachers' needs for professional development

Percentage of lower secondary teachers indicating they have a high level of need for professional development in the following areas

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Knowledge of the curriculum

Knowledge of the subject field(s)

School management and administration

Pedagogical competencies

Developing competencies for future work

Teaching cross-curricular skills

Student evaluation and assessment practice

Student career guidance and counselling

Approaches to individualised learning

Teaching in a multicultural or multilingual setting

Student behaviour and classroom management

New technologies in the workplace

ICT skills for teaching

Teaching students with special needs

Average

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 37 37 Impact of professional development

…the professional development in which they have participated has had a positive impact on their teaching. ·

Regardless of the content, over 3/4 of teache

rs report that…

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 38 38

Teachers feedback : direct classroom observations

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Bul

garia

Pol

and

Uni

ted

Sta

tes

Rom

ania

Alb

erta

(Can

ada)

Cro

atia

Cze

ch R

epub

lic

Abu

Dha

bi (U

AE

)

Flan

ders

(Bel

gium

)

Ser

bia

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Japa

n

Isra

el

Aver

age

Sin

gapo

re

Latv

ia

Bra

zil

Mex

ico

Mal

aysi

a

Sw

eden

Est

onia

Eng

land

(UK

)

Nor

way

Finl

and

Por

tuga

l

Den

mar

k

Kor

ea

Chi

le

Italy

Net

herla

nds

Fran

ce

Spa

in

Icel

and

Aus

tralia

Perc

enta

ge o

f tea

cher

s

Principals School Management Other teachers

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 39 39 Feedback and change in behavior

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who report a "moderate" or "large" positive change in the following issues after they received feedback on their work

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Con

fiden

ce a

s a

teac

her

Mot

ivat

ion

Job

satis

fact

ion

Kno

wle

dge

and

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

mai

n su

bjec

t fie

ld(s

)

Teac

hing

pra

ctic

es

Stu

dent

ass

essm

ents

to im

prov

e st

uden

t le

arni

ng

Cla

ssro

om m

anag

emen

t pra

ctic

es

Met

hods

for t

each

ing

stud

ents

with

spe

cial

ne

eds

Pub

lic re

cogn

ition

Job

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

Rol

e in

sch

ool d

evel

opm

ent i

nitia

tives

Am

ount

of p

rofe

ssio

nal d

evel

opm

ent

Like

lihoo

d of

car

eer a

dvan

cem

ent

Sal

ary

and/

or fi

nanc

ial b

onus

Average Italy

Personal Pedagogical Professional

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 40 40 Consequences of feedback

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that:

0 20 40 60 80

If a teacher is consistently underperforming, he/she would be dismissed

The best performing teachers in this school receive the greatest recognition

Teacher appraisal and feedback have little impact upon the way teachers teach in the classroom

A mentor is appointed to help teachers improve his/her teaching

A development or training plan is established to improve their work as a teacher

Italy Average

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 41 41 Teachers and feedback

On average across TALIS countries,

...and only one in 5 receive feedback from

three sources.

Just above half of the teachers report receiving feedback on t

heir teaching from one or two sources

Math(teaching(≠(math(teaching(PISA(=(reason(mathema6cally(and(understand,(formulate,(employ(

and(interpret(mathema6cal(concepts,(facts(and(procedures(

42

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50 Vi

et N

am

Mac

ao-C

hina

S

hang

hai-C

hina

Tu

rkey

U

rugu

ay

Gre

ece

Hon

g K

ong-

Chi

na

Chi

nese

Tai

pei

Por

tuga

l B

razi

l S

erbi

a B

ulga

ria

Sin

gapo

re

Net

herla

nds

Japa

n A

rgen

tina

Cos

ta R

ica

Lith

uani

a Tu

nisi

a N

ew Z

eala

nd

Cze

ch R

epub

lic

Isra

el

Kor

ea

Latv

ia

Qat

ar

Italy

U

nite

d S

tate

s E

ston

ia

Irela

nd

Aus

tralia

M

exic

o U

nite

d A

rab

Em

irate

s N

orw

ay

Mal

aysi

a K

azak

hsta

n U

nite

d K

ingd

om

Rom

ania

O

EC

D a

vera

ge

Alb

ania

C

olom

bia

Indo

nesi

a S

wed

en

Bel

gium

P

eru

Thai

land

D

enm

ark

Rus

sian

Fed

erat

ion

Can

ada

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

H

unga

ry

Ger

man

y C

roat

ia

Luxe

mbo

urg

Mon

tene

gro

Chi

le

Pol

and

Finl

and

Aus

tria

Slo

veni

a Fr

ance

S

witz

erla

nd

Jord

an

Liec

hten

stei

n S

pain

Ic

elan

d

Inde

x of

exp

osur

e to

wor

d pr

oble

ms

Focus&on&‘word&problems’& Fig I.3.1a 43

Formal(math(situated(in(a(word(problem,(where(it(is(obvious(to(students(what(mathema6cal(

knowledge(and(skills(are(needed(

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50 S

wed

en

Icel

and

Tuni

sia

Arg

entin

a S

witz

erla

nd

Bra

zil

Luxe

mbo

urg

Irela

nd

Net

herla

nds

New

Zea

land

C

osta

Ric

a A

ustri

a Li

echt

enst

ein

Mal

aysi

a In

done

sia

Den

mar

k U

nite

d K

ingd

om

Uru

guay

Li

thua

nia

Ger

man

y A

ustra

lia

Chi

le

OE

CD

ave

rage

S

lova

k R

epub

lic

Thai

land

Q

atar

Fi

nlan

d P

ortu

gal

Col

ombi

a M

exic

o P

eru

Cze

ch R

epub

lic

Isra

el

Italy

B

elgi

um

Hon

g K

ong-

Chi

na

Pol

and

Fran

ce

Spa

in

Mon

tene

gro

Gre

ece

Turk

ey

Slo

veni

a Vi

et N

am

Hun

gary

B

ulga

ria

Kaz

akhs

tan

Chi

nese

Tai

pei

Can

ada

Uni

ted

Sta

tes

Est

onia

R

oman

ia

Latv

ia

Ser

bia

Japa

n K

orea

C

roat

ia

Alb

ania

R

ussi

an F

eder

atio

n U

nite

d A

rab

Em

irate

s Jo

rdan

M

acao

-Chi

na

Sin

gapo

re

Sha

ngha

i-Chi

na

Inde

x of

exp

osur

e to

form

al m

athe

mat

ics

Focus&on&‘conceptual&understanding’& Fig I.3.1b 44

45 45 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money(pits(

Must(haves(

Low(hanging(fruits(

Quick(wins(







❒  Incen6ves,(accountability,(knowledge(management(!  Aligned(incen6ve(structures(

For(students(!  How(gateways(affect(the(strength,(direc6on,(clarity(and(nature(of(the(incen6ves(

opera6ng(on(students(at(each(stage(of(their(educa6on((!  Degree(to(which(students(have(incen6ves(to(take(tough(courses(and(study(hard(!  Opportunity(costs(for(staying(in(school(and(performing(well(

For(teachers(!  Make(innova6ons(in(pedagogy(and/or(organisa6on((!  Improve(their(own(performance((

and(the(performance(of(their(colleagues(!  Pursue(professional(development(opportuni6es((

that(lead(to(stronger(pedagogical(prac6ces(

!  A(balance(between(ver6cal(and(lateral(accountability(!  Effec6ve(instruments(to(manage(and(share(knowledge(and(spread(

innova6on(–(communica6on(within(the(system(and(with(stakeholders(around(it(

!  A(capable(centre(with(authority(and(legi6macy(to(act((

46 46 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s

��

�� Align autonomy with accountability

The'ques3on'is'not'how'many'charter'schools'you'have'but'how'you'enable'every'teacher'to'assume'charterClike'autonomy'

47 47 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s

��

��

Hong Kong-China

Brazil

Uruguay

Albania

Croatia

Latvia

Lithuania

Chinese Taipei

Thailand Bulgaria

Jordan

Macao-China

UAE Argentina

Indonesia

Kazakhstan

Peru

Costa Rica Tunisia

Qatar

Singapore

Colombia

Malaysia

Serbia

Romania

Viet Nam

Shanghai-China

USA

Poland

New Zealand

Greece UK

Estonia

Finland

Slovak Rep.

Luxembourg

Germany Austria Czech Rep.

France

Japan

Turkey

Sweden

Hungary Australia

Israel

Canada

Chile

Belgium Netherlands

Spain Denmark

Switzerland

Iceland

Slovenia Portugal

Norway

Korea

Italy

R² = 0.13

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5

Mat

hem

atic

s pe

rfor

man

ce (s

core

poi

nts)

Index of school responsibility for curriculum and assessment (index points)

Countries that grant schools autonomy over curricula and assessments tend to perform better in mathematics

Source: PISA 2012

No standardised math policy

Standardised math policy 455

460

465

470

475

480

485

Less school autonomy

More school autonomy

Schools with more autonomy perform better than schools with less autonomy in systems with standardised math policies

Score points

School autonomy for curriculum and assessment x system's extent of implementing a standardised math policy (e.g. curriculum and instructional materials)

Fig IV.1.16

Schools with more autonomy perform better than schools with less autonomy in systems with more collaboration

Teachers don't participate in management

Teachers participate in management 455

460

465

470

475

480

485

Less school autonomy

More school autonomy

Score points

School autonomy for resource allocation x System's level of teachers participating in school management Across all participating countries and economies

Fig IV.1.17

0 20 40 60 80 100

Written specification of the school's curriculum and educational goals

Written specification of student-performance standards

Systematic recording of data, including teacher and student attendance and graduation rates, test results and

Internal evaluation/self-evaluation

External evaluation

Written feedback from students (e.g. regarding lessons, teachers or resources)

Teacher mentoring

Regular consultation with one or more experts over a period of at least six months with the aim of improving

Implementation of a standardised policy for mathematics

%

Percentage of students in schools whose principal reported that their schools have the following for quality assurance and improvement:

Italy Singapore OECD average

Quality assurance and school improvement Fig IV.4.14 50

51 51 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money(pits(

Must(haves(

Low(hanging(fruits(

Quick(wins(







❒  Inves6ng(resources(where(they(can(make(most(of(a(difference(!  Alignment(of(resources(with(key(challenges((e.g.(

aMrac6ng(the(most(talented(teachers(to(the(most(challenging(classrooms)(

!  Effec6ve(spending(choices(that(priori6se(high(quality(teachers(over(smaller(classes(

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 52 52 What teachers do beyond teaching

Average number of 60-minute hours teachers report spending on the following tasks in an average week

Finland Malaysia

Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates) Flanders (Belgium)

Israel Italy Malaysia

Japan Malaysia Sweden

Finland Korea

Finland Malaysia

Finland Korea

Finland Malaysia Portugal Singapore

Croatia Finland Japan

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Number of hours

School management

Communication with parents

All other tasks

Extracurricular activities

Student counselling

Team work

Administrative work

Marking

Planning

53 53 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 Austria France

Japan

Turkey Sweden Hungary Australia Israel

Canada Ireland

Chile

Belgium

Spain Denmark

Switzerland

Iceland

Slovenia

Portugal Norway

Mexico

Korea

Italy

R² = 0.19

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5

Mat

hem

atic

s pe

rfor

man

ce (s

core

poi

nts)

Equity in resource allocation (index points)

Greater equity Less equity

Adjusted by per capita GDP

Countries'with'beXer'performance'in'mathema3cs'tend'to'allocate'educa3onal'resources'more'equitably''

Source: PISA 2012

54

54

54 Square school choice with equity

Financial'incen3ves'for'schools'

Assistance'for'disadvantaged'

parents'

Controlled(choice(

Financial(incen6ves(

Inform(parents(

Foster(collabora6on(

among(teachers(and(

schools(

Use(student(and(school(assessments(

55 55 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money(pits(

Must(haves(

Low(hanging(fruits(

Quick(wins(







❒  A(learning(system(!  An(outward(orienta6on(to(keep(the(system(learning,(

technology,(interna6onal(benchmarks(as(the(‘eyes’(and(‘ears’(of(the(system(

!  Recognising(challenges(and(poten6al(future(threats(to(current(success,(learning(from(them,(designing(responses(and(implemen6ng(these(

56 56 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money(pits(

Must(haves(

Low(hanging(fruits(

Quick(wins(







❒  Coherence(of(policies(and(prac6ces(!  Alignment(of(policies((

across(all(aspects(of(the(system(!  Coherence(of(policies((

over(sustained(periods(of(6me(!  Consistency(of(implementa6on((!  Fidelity(of(implementa6on((

(without(excessive(control)(

57 57 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money(pits(

Must(haves(

Low(hanging(fruits(

Quick(wins(







58 58 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s

Average'school'systems' High'performers'in'PISA'

Some(students(learn((at(high(levels( "( All(students(learn(

(at(high(levels(

Uniformity( "( Embracing(diversity(

Curriculum4centred( "( Learner4centred(

Learning(a(place( "( Learning(an(ac6vity(

Prescrip6on( "( Informed(profession(

Delivered(wisdom( "( User4generated(wisdom(

Provision(( "( Outcomes(

Bureaucra6c(look4up( "( Devolved(–(look(outwards(

Administra6ve(control(and(accountability( "( Professional(forms(of((

work(organisa6on(

Conformity( "( Ingenious(

Standardise(distribu6on((of(resources( "(

AMract(the(most(talented((teachers(to(the(most((challenging(classrooms(

Management( "( Leadership(

Public(vs(private( "( Public(with(private(

Idiosyncra6c(reforms( "(Alignment(of(policies,((coherence(over(6me,((fidelity(of(implementa6on(

59 59 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s

Some(students(learn(at(high(levels( All'students(need(to(learn(at(high(levels(

Student(inclusion(

Rou6ne(cogni6ve(skills,(rote(learning( Learning(to(learn,(complex(ways(of(thinking,(ways(of(working(

Curriculum,(instruc6on(and(assessment(

Few(years(more(than(secondary( High4level(professional(knowledge(workers(

Teacher(quality(

‘Tayloris6c’,(hierarchical( Flat,(collegial(

Work(organisa6on(

Primarily(to(authori6es( Primarily(to(peers(and(stakeholders(

Accountability(

What(it(all(means(

The(old(bureaucra6c(system( The(modern(enabling(system(

60 60 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s

��

�� Thank you�

Find(out(more(about(our(work(at(www.oecd.org(– All(publica6ons(– The(complete(micro4level(database(

Email:([email protected]'TwiMer:(SchleicherEDU'

and(remember:(Without(data,(you(are(just(another(person(with(an(opinion(

Date post:	15-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dinhdien
View:	217 times
Download:	3 times

Strong'performers'and'successful' reformers'in… · Strong'performers'and'successful'...

Documents