19 May 2016Andreas SchleicherDirector for Education and Skills, OECD
REVIEWS OF NATIONAL POLICIES FOR EDUCATION: EDUCATION IN LATVIAPROGRESS, CHALLENGES AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
2
Reviews of National Policies for Education: Education in Latvia
Early childhood education and care
Primary and lower secondary education
Upper secondary general and vocational education
Tertiary education
Enrolm
ent rate at age 3 in EC
EC
, 2013
3
Participation in E
CE
C is high and starts
early in Latvia
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90100
IsraelFrance
BelgiumUnited Kingdom
DenmarkNew Zealand
IcelandSpain
NorwayItaly
SwedenGermany
EstoniaSlovenia
NetherlandsLatviaJapan
PortugalOECD average
AustriaLuxembourg
FinlandSlovak Republic
AustraliaCzech Republic
PolandChile
IrelandMexico
United StatesTurkey
Switzerland
Early childhood educational program
mes (IS
CE
D 01)
Pre-prim
ary education (ISC
ED
02)
Pre-prim
ary education (ISC
ED
02) (2005)
4
ECEC enrolment
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
under age of 3 aged 3 aged 4 aged 5 aged 6 aged 7
% 2002 2003 2006 2009 2012
Net enrolment rate of children up to age 7, 2002-2012
Latvian students’ performance on PISA
5
Significant improvements in student performance
450
460
470
480
490
500
510
2003 2006 2009 2012
Mathematics performance (2003-2012)
Latvia OECD average
450
460
470
480
490
500
510
2000 2003 2006 2009 2012
Reading performance (2000-2012)
Latvia OECD average
450
460
470
480
490
500
510
2006 2009 2012
Science performance (2006-2012)
Latvia OECD average
6
Upper secondary education attainment is high across generations
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Latv
ia
Est
on
ia
Un
ite
d S
tate
s
No
rwa
y
Ge
rma
ny
Cze
ch R
ep
ub
lic
Sw
itze
rla
nd
Ca
na
da
Slo
va
k R
ep
ub
lic
De
nm
ark
Sw
ed
en
Hu
ng
ary
Isra
el
Po
lan
d
Ice
lan
d
Au
stri
a
Un
ite
d K
ing
do
m
Fin
lan
d
Ne
w Z
ea
lan
d
Luxe
mb
ou
rg
OE
CD
av
era
ge
Slo
ve
nia
Me
xico
Ne
the
rla
nd
s
Au
stra
lia
Fra
nce
Tu
rke
y
Be
lgiu
m
Sp
ain
Ita
ly
Ire
lan
d
Gre
ece
Po
rtu
ga
l
Ch
ile
Ko
rea
Difference between the 25-34 and 55-64 year-old population with upper secondary education (right axis)
Proportion of the 25-34 year-old population with upper secondary education (left axis)
Proportion of the 55-64 year-old population with upper secondary education (left axis)
%
Early leavers from
education and training, age group 18-24
7
Good progress in reducing early school
leavers
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Slovenia
Poland
Czech Republic
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Slovakia
Sweden
Ireland
Austria
Denmark
France
Latvia
Netherlands
Greece
Germany
Finland
Belgium
EU 28
Estonia
Hungary
United Kingdom
Italy
Portugal
Spain
%2010
2014
8
Many students continue into tertiary
education
0 20 40 60 80
100
AustraliaLatvia
IcelandPoland
New ZealandNorway
SloveniaDenmark
United States1Korea
United KingdomFinland
NetherlandsPortugal
Slovak RepublicSweden
IsraelCzech RepublicOECD average
IrelandHungary
GermanyAustria
SpainJapanChileItaly
SwitzerlandEstoniaFranceTurkeyGreeceMexico
BelgiumLuxembourg
%A
cademic tertiary
Professional tertiary
Entry rates to tertiary education, 2012
Estimated changes in population between 2012 and 2020 by age groups
“Remarkable achievements” considering the socio -economic challenges
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
New
Zea
land
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
Nor
way
Can
ada
Por
tuga
lF
inla
ndB
elgi
umN
ethe
rland
sS
wed
enF
ranc
eO
EC
D a
vera
geE
ston
iaS
witz
erla
ndP
olan
dG
erm
any
Spa
inC
zech
Rep
ublic
Latv
iaH
unga
ryS
lova
k R
epub
lic
% of GDP
Expenditure on primary to tertiary education institutions as a percentage of GDP (2012)
-11%
-3%
19%
-16%
-42%
-18%
7%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34Age groups
The kind of things that
are easy to teach are
now easy to automate,
digitize or outsource
Robotics
>1m km,
one minor accident,
occasional human intervention
Augmented Reality
A lot more to come
• 3D printing• Synthetic biology• Brain enhancements• Nanomaterials• Etc.
Changes in the demand for skillsTrends in different tasks in occupations (United States)
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
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.
16
Challenges and recommendations
Early childhood education and care
Primary and lower secondary education
Upper secondary general and vocational education
Tertiary education
Form
al childcare by duration -%
over the population of 0-2 year-olds (2014)
17
Participation of the youngest children is
still relatively low
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Denmark
Sweden
Norway
Belgium
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Portugal
Iceland
France
Spain
Slovenia
Switzerland
Finland
United Kingdom
Ireland
EU 27
Germany
Italy
Lithuania
Latvia
Estonia
Austria
Hungary
Greece
Slovakia
Czech Republic
Poland
%30 hours or over
From
1 to 29 hours
18
Participation in ECEC is unequal across Latvia
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Institutions in urban areas (left axis) Institutions in rural areas (left axis)
Enrolment in urban areas, thsd (right axis) Enrolment in rural areas, thsd (right axis)
Age distribution of ECEC teachers
19
Barriers to developing a high -quality and motivated ECEC profession
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Nor
way
Bel
gium
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
Aus
tria
Pol
and
Slo
veni
a
Luxe
mbo
urg
Fra
nce
Ger
man
y
Sw
itzer
land
Spa
in
Latv
ia
Net
herla
nds
Cze
ch R
epub
lic
Est
onia
Lith
uani
a
50 years or over 40 to 49 30 to 39 less than 30
Differences in m
athematics perform
ance, by attendance at pre-primary school
20
Need for strengthen data collection,
monitoring and use of research
-20 0 20 40 60 80
100
120
FranceSlovak Republic
BelgiumItaly
SwitzerlandCzech Republic
IsraelDenmarkGermany
United KingdomGreece
SpainJapan
FinlandPoland
SwedenAustralia
New ZealandOECD average
NetherlandsAustria
LuxembourgMexicoIceland
PortugalTurkey
CanadaNorway
LithuaniaChile
KoreaUnited States
SloveniaIrelandLatvia
Estonia
Score-point difference between students who attended pre-primary school for more than one year
and those who had not attended
Before accounting for socio-econom
ic status
After accounting for socio-econom
ic status
21
Governance and financing hamper equal access to quality ECEC
• Continue expanding ECEC services, in particular in rural areas and for the youngest children
• Take a strategic approach to improving the quality and motivation of ECEC staff
• Strengthen data collection, monitoring and use of research
• Review the governance and financing arrangements of ECEC
22
Recommendations for ECEC
23
Challenges and recommendations
Early childhood education and care
Primary and lower secondary education
Upper secondary general and vocational education
Tertiary education
24
Students and teacher supply
0
5 000
10 000
15 000
20 000
25 000
0
50 000
100 000
150 000
200 000
250 000
300 000
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Number of students, Grades 1-9 (left axis)Number of teachers, Grades 1-9 (right axis)
430
440
450
460
470
480
490
500
510
520
City (> 100 000) Town (3 000 - 100000)
Rural (< 3 000)
PISA 2012 mathematics performance and school location in Latvia
Disparities in equity across the Latvian school system
Gap equivalent to more than one year of
schooling
At-risk-of-poverty rate for children under age 6
26
Disparities in equity across the Latvian
school system
0 5 10 15 20 25
Finland
Netherlands
Ireland
Czech Republic
Denmark
Norway
Switzerland
Germany
United Kingdom
Iceland
Slovenia
France
Sweden
Belgium
Estonia
EU 27
Latvia
Slovakia
Austria
Poland
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Hungary
Portugal
Spain
Italy
Greece
%2013
2010
27
Underdeveloped assessment and evaluation arrangements
SteeringPriority setting Accountability
ImplementationPolicy Design
Knowledge use
Knowledge production
28
Low rem
uneration and low status of the
education profession
0,0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1,0
1,2
1,4
1,6
1,8
2,0
Korea
Mexico
Germany
Portugal
Spain
Netherlands
Ireland
New Zealand
Canada
Japan
United Kingdom
Denmark
Chile
Slovenia
Luxembourg
Belgium
Australia
Finland
Italy
Greece
Austria
France
Israel
Lithuania
Poland
United States
Sweden
Norway
Czech Republic
Iceland
Hungary
Estonia
Slovak Republic
Latvia
%
Lower secondary teachers' salaries (after 15 years of experience/m
inimum
training) relative to per capita G
DP
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
Port
ugal
Spa
in
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Belg
ium
Kor
ea
Lux
em
bou
rg
Germ
any
Gre
ece
Jap
an
Aus
tral
ia
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
New
Zeal
and
Fra
nce
Neth
erl
ands
Denm
ark
Ita
ly
Aus
tria
Czech
Repu
blic
Hun
gary
Nor
way
Ice
land
Ire
land
Mex
ico
Fin
land
Sw
eden
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Pola
nd
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Salary as % of GDP/capita Instruction time 1/teaching time 1/class size
Contribution of various factors to upper secondary teacher compensation costs, per student as a percentage of GDP per capita
Percentage points
Difference with OECD average
Policy levers to teacher professionalism
Knowledge base for teaching (initial education and incentives for professional development)
Autonomy: Teachers’ decision-making power over their work (teaching content, course offerings, discipline practices)
Peer networks: Opportunities for exchange and support needed to maintain high standards of teaching (participation in induction, mentoring, networks, feedback from direct observations)
Teacherprofessionalism
Teacher professionalism
Knowledge base for teaching (initial education and incentives for professional development)
Autonomy: Teachers’ decision-making power over their work (teaching content, course offerings, discipline practices)
Peer networks: Opportunities for exchange and support needed to maintain high standards of teaching (participation in induction, mentoring, networks, feedback from direct observations)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Spain
Japan
France
Brazil
Finland
Flanders
Norway
Alberta (Canada)
Australia
Denmark
Israel
Korea
United States
Czech Republic
Shanghai (China)
Latvia
Netherlands
Poland
England
New Zealand
Singapore
Estonia
Netw
orksA
utonomy
Know
ledge
Mean m
athematics perform
ance, by school location, after accounting for socio-econom
ic statusF
ig II.3.332 32
TALIS
Teacher professionalism index
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
100
Discuss individual
students
Share resources
Team conferences
Collaborate for common
standards
Team teaching
Collaborative PD
Joint activities
Classroom observations
Percentage of teachers
Professio
nal co
llaboratio
n
Percentage of low
er secondary teachers who report doing the follow
ing activities at least once per month
Professional collaboration am
ong teachers
Exchan
ge an
d co
-ord
inatio
n
Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status
Fig II.3.33434 Teachers Self-Efficacy and Professional Collaborati on
11,40
11,60
11,80
12,00
12,20
12,40
12,60
12,80
13,00
13,20
13,40
Nev
er
Once
a y
ear
or
less
2-4
tim
es a
yea
r
5-10
tim
es a
yea
r
1-3
tim
es a
month
Once
a w
eek
or
more
Teac
her
sel
f-ef
fica
cy (le
vel)
Teach jointly as a
team in the same
class
Observe other
teachers’ classes and
provide feedback
Engage in joint
activities across
different classes
Take part in
collaborative
professional learning
Less frequently
Morefrequently
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Low professionalism
High professionalism
Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status
Fig II.3.33535 Teacher professionalism index and teacher outcomes
Perceptions of teachers’ status
Satisfaction with the profession
Satisfaction with the work environment
Teachers’ self-efficacy
Predicted percentile
• Establish the conditions for a high-quality teaching and leadership profession
• Promote equity and excellence in education, with a focus on rural schools
• Develop a coherent assessment and evaluation framework for informing policy and educational practice
36
Recommendations for primary and lower secondary education
37
Challenges and recommendations
Early childhood education and care
Primary and lower secondary education
Upper secondary general and vocational education
Tertiary education
Perceived quality and image of vocational education
38
Lack of quality and relevance of vocational education
EU27
BEL
CZE
DNK
DEU
EST
IRLGRC
ESP
FRA
ITA
LatviaLUX
HUN
NLD
AUT
POL
PRT
SVN
SVK
FIN
SWE
GBR
45
55
65
75
85
95
60 65 70 75 80 85 90
Imag
e o
f V
ET
(%
of
'po
siti
ve‘
resp
on
ses)
VET offers high quality learning (% of 'agree' responses)
39
Stark divide between upper secondary general and vocational pathways
Participation of adults in form
al and non-formal learning, 2014
40
Lifelong learning underdeveloped
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Denmark
Sweden
Finland
France
Netherlands
United Kingdom
Austria
Luxembourg
Slovenia
Estonia
EU 28
Spain
Portugal
Czech Republic
Italy
Germany
Belgium
Ireland
Latvia
Lithuania
Poland
Hungary
Greece
Slovakia
%
EU
target
• Continue improving the quality and relevance of vocational education
• Narrow the divide between general and vocational upper secondary education
• Increase efforts to raise participation in lifelong learning
41
Recommendations for upper secondary general and vocational education
42
Challenges and recommendations
Early childhood education and care
Primary and lower secondary education
Upper secondary general and vocational education
Tertiary education
43
System capacity not aligned with demographic decline, fiscal reality and labour market needs
Number of tertiary education institutions and students
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Number of institutions (left axis) Number of students (right axis)
44
System capacity not aligned with demographic decline, fiscal reality and labour market needs
Percentage of graduates by field of study
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Education
Humanities and art
Social sciences, business and law
Natural sciences, mathematics and informationtechnologies
Engineering, manufacturing and construction
Agriculture
Health and welfare
Services
2004 2009 2014
45
Inadequate tertiary education funding
0
5 000
10 000
15 000
20 000
25 000
Luxembourg
United States
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Sweden
Norway
Netherlands
Finland
Germany
Japan
Australia
Austria
Belgium
France
Ireland
New Zealand
Spain
Israel
Slovenia
Czech Republic
Italy
Korea
Poland
Iceland
Portugal
Slovak Republic
Hungary
Estonia
Mexico
Chile
Turkey
Latvia
Annual expenditure per tertiary student by educational
institutions for all services (2012)
OE
CD
average
In equivalent US
D
converted using PP
Ps)
32 876
Pillar 1: basic funding
Pillar 2: performance-
oriented funding
Pillar 3: innovation-
oriented funding
Teaching • number of study places (per field)
• cost-oriented weight
• number of graduates
• number of incoming and outgoing students
profile-orientedtarget
agreementsteaching +
research + third missionResearch • number of
professors/academic staff (per field)
• cost-orientedweight
• bibliometricindicator
• third party funds• number of PhDs
46
Proposed tertiary education financing model
Funding of centres of excellence
Institutional indicators
Institutional indicators
47
Concerns about the quality of tertiary
education and science
European Innovation S
coreboards: Sum
mary Innovation Index 2014
0,0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
Switzerland
Sweden
Denmark
Finland
Germany
Netherlands
Luxembourg
United Kingdom
Ireland
Iceland
Belgium
France
Austria
EU
Slovenia
Estonia
Norway
Czech Republic
Italy
Portugal
Spain
Hungary
Greece
Slovakia
Poland
Lithuania
Latvia
Turkey
• Move forward with the implementation of the three-pillar financing model
• Continue improving the quality of tertiary education and science
• Continue efforts to realign system capacity with demographic decline, fiscal reality and labour market needs
• Strengthen the capacity for strategic leadership and management
48
Recommendations for tertiary education
49
Making educational reform happen
• Clear and consistent priorities (across governments and across time), ambition and urgency, and the capacity to learn rapidly.
Shared vision
• Appropriate targets, real-time data, monitoring, incentives aligned to targets, accountability, and the capacity to intervene where necessary.
Performance
management
• Building professional capabilities, sharing best practice and innovation, flexible management, and frontline ethos aligned with system objectives.
Frontline capacity
• Strong leadership at every level, including teacher leadership, adequate process design and consistency of focus across agencies.
Delivery architecture
Resilience to
political
change
Engage
stakeholders
Careful
piloting
Sustainable
resources
Careful timing
Partnership
with the
profession
• Acknowledge divergent views and interests
• Communicate, communicate, communicate
– Feedback reduces the likelihood of strong
opposition
– Involvement of stakeholders cultivates a sense
of joint ownership over policies, and hence helps
build consensus over both the need and the
relevance of reforms
• Mechanisms of regular and institutionalised
consultation contribute to the development
of trust among parties, and help them reach
consensus
– Regular interactions raise awareness of the
concerns of others, thus fostering a climate of
compromise
• External pressures can build a compelling
case for change .
50 Successful reform implementation
Strive for
consensus about
the aims without
compromising the drive
for improvement
Resilience to
political
change
Engage
stakeholders
Careful
piloting
Sustainable
resources
Careful timing
Partnership
with the
profession
• Regular involvement by teachers in
policy design helps to build capacity and
shared ideas over time
• Several countries have established
teaching councils that provide teachers
with both a forum for policy
development and, critically, a
mechanism for profession-led standard
setting and quality assurance in teacher
education, teacher induction, teacher
performance and career development
• Policy can encourage the formation of
such communities .
51 Successful reform implementation
Engage teachers
not just in the
implementation of
reform but in their
design
Resilience to
political
change
Engage
stakeholders
Careful
piloting
Sustainable
resources
Careful timing
Partnership
with the
profession
• Currently only one in ten educational
reforms is evaluated
• Policy experimentation can help build
consensus on implementation and can
prove powerful in testing out policy
initiatives and – by virtue of their
temporary nature and limited scope –
overcoming fears and resistance by
specific groups of stakeholders.
52 Successful reform implementation
Use and evaluate
pilot projects before
full implementation
Resilience to
political
change
Engage
stakeholders
Careful
piloting
Sustainable
resources
Careful timing
Partnership
with the
profession
• The benefits for ‘winners’ are often
insufficient to mobilise support, the
costs for ‘losers’ are concentrated
• Need for consistent, co-ordinated
efforts to persuade those affected of
the need for change and, in particular,
to communicate the costs of inaction
53 Successful reform implementation
Back reforms with
sustainable capacity
Resilience to
political
change
Engage
stakeholders
Careful
piloting
Sustainable
resources
Careful timing
Partnership
with the
profession
• All political players and stakeholders
need to develop realistic expectations
about the pace and nature of reforms to
improve outcomes
• Certain reform measures are best
introduced before others, particularly
because of the substantial gap between
the time at which the initial cost of
reform is incurred, and the time when
the intended benefits of reforms
materialise
• Time is needed to learn about and
understand impact, to build trust and
develop capacity for the next stage .
54 Successful reform implementation
Time implementation
carefully
Resilience to
political
change
Engage
stakeholders
Careful
piloting
Sustainable
resources
Careful timing
Partnership
with the
profession
• Putting the teaching profession at the
heart of education reform requires a
fruitful dialogue between governments
and unions
• Teachers should not just be part of the
implementation of reforms but also part
of their design
• Conflict isn’t best addressed by weak
unions but by strong social partnership .
55 Successful reform implementation
Build partnerships
with education
unions to design and
implement reforms
5656Le
sson
s fr
om h
igh
perf
orm
ers
Some students learn at high levels All students need to learn at high levels
Student inclusion
Routine cognitive skills Conceptual understanding,
complex ways of thinking, ways of working
Curriculum, instruction and assessment
Standardisation and compliance High-level professional knowledge workers
Teacher quality
‘Tayloristic’, hierarchical Flat, collegial
Work organisation
Primarily to authorities Primarily to peers and stakeholders
Accountability
What it all means
The old bureaucratic system The modern enabling system