Belgrade 6 December- The Overview of Data Availability: WB & Turkey

1. Belgrade 6 December- The Overview of Data Availability: WB & Turkey

2. WHAT IS THE ETF? • Agency of the European Union • VisionTo make vocational education and training in the partner countries a driver for lifelong learning and sustainable development, with a special focus on competitiveness and social cohesion. • MissionTo help transition and developing countries to harness the potential of their human capital through the reform of education, training and labour market systems in the context of the EU’s external relations policy.

3. OthercountriesfromCentral Asia: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan Candidate countries: Croatia, former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Turkey Potential candidate countries: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo (UNSCR 1244/1999), Serbia European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument countries ENP South: Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Occupied Palestinian Territory, Syria, Tunisia and Israel ENP East: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Republic of Moldova, Ukraine and Russia

4. Structure 1.The assessment of data availability for Torino Process 2010 2.Data availability for Torino Process 2012 (the assessment of countries’ feedbacks) 3. Conclusion

5. Torino Process Key Indicator Manual-What’s this manual about? Practical guide: It provides tools & ideas on how to use indicators in a national policy-making context • Starting point: • What are our policy objectives? • How can our policy objectives be converted into indicators? • the analytical process: definition, calculation and analysis of indicators • characteristics of indicators levels of breakdown • presentation tools and consistency of results • possible sources

6. EU developments • Strategy: Europe 2020 (“smart, sustainable and inclusive Europe”) and Integrated Guidelines for the economic and employment policies of Member States • Guidelines 7-10: increasing labour market participation and reducing structural unemployment; skilled workforce, job quality and LLL; improving performance of education and training systems; promoting social inclusion and reducing poverty • April 2012 Employment Package • Education and Training 2020 • New financing instruments 2014-2020: 'Education Europe‘ - integrated programme of €15.2 billion for education, training and youth with focus on skills and mobility; ‘Creative Europe’ €1.6 billion • European Social Fund  IPA Comp. IV HRD for candidate countries 6

7. Western Balkans and Turkey and EU benchmarks on education Sources Early school leavers - EU27, RS, HR, MK, and TR: Eurostat; AL: LFS; BH: UNDP, "National Human Development Report 2007"; ME: UNDP, "National Human Development Report 2009" Tertiary educational attainment (30-34) - EU27, HR, MK, and TR: Eurostat; AL: LFS. Lifelong learning - EU27, HR, MK, and TR: Eurostat; AL, ME and RS: LFS Four-year-olds in education - EU27, HR, MK, and TR: Eurostat; AL, ME and RS: UNESCO Pupils' performance in reading: OECD, "PISA 2009 Results":; EU average refers to the 25 EU countries participating to PISA 2009

8. Western Balkans and Turkey and EU benchmarks on education

9. Which sources do we refer to? • Sources for educational, demographic and financial data: • Surveys • Censuses • Administrative databases • Reports • These data may come from: • Ministry of Education • Ministry of Finance • National Statistical Offices • International Sources

10. State of the art Details of the coverage of the data collected for the Torino Process key indicators 2010 and 2012 Overview of problems and recommendations regarding data availability, classification multiplicity, and regional diversities

11. DATA COLLECTION – TORINO PROCESS 2010 Extended list of indicators ↓ ETF gathered the data in the following order: 1. International sources (UNESCO, World Bank,…) 2. National (publicly available) sources (LFS, educational data,…) 3. Requests to countries

12. DATA COLLECTION – TORINO PROCESS 2010 3 groups of indicators: • Data on labour market performance (incl. administrative data from public employment services) • Education data (with special focus on VET) • Socio-economic data and international indexes

13. DATA COLLECTION – TORINO PROCESS 2010 We can distinguish between 3 levels of precision: • Exact indicators • Partial indicators • Proxy indicators

14. Table 1. Coverage of indicators in WB&T – LABOUR MARKET Green = indicator available; Yellow = proxy/partial indicator available; Red = missing data.

15. Table 2. Coverage of indicators in WB&T – PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT SERVICES Green = indicator available; Yellow = proxy/partial indicator available; Red = missing data.

16. Table 3. Coverage of indicators in WB&T – EDUCATION: ATTAINMENT AND ENROLMENT Green = indicator available; Yellow = proxy/partial indicator available; Red = missing data.

17. Table 3. Coverage of indicators in WB&T – EDUCATION: ATTAINMENT AND ENROLMENT Green = indicator available; Yellow = proxy/partial indicator available; Red = missing data.

18. Table 4. Coverage of indicators in WB&T – EDUCATION: EXPENDITURE AND TEACHERS Green = indicator available; Yellow = proxy/partial indicator available; Red = missing data.

19. Table 5. Coverage of indicators in WB&T – SOCIOECONOMIC CONTEXT Green = indicator available; Yellow = proxy/partial indicator available; Red = missing data.

20. DATA COLLECTION – TORINO PROCESS 2010 • High data coverage in case of labour market and socio-economic indicators • Gaps in case of education data - especially VET and adult learning • Comparability issues raised a) the reference population used in the case of labour market indicators b) the compliance of education levels with ISCED classification

21. TORINO PROCESS 2012 – statistical component Goals: To collect a restricted list of indicators with basic data on labour market, education and socio-economic context; To reflect the ‘real’ data availability and gaps; To reflect on ‘how’ to overcome the gaps and enhance mutual learning and cooperation.

22. TORINO PROCESS 2012 – feedback from countries – Bosnia and Herzegovina STRONG POINTS During TP 2010 and 2012 data collections, detailed and updated data on labour market were found. OPPORTUNITIES According to the country feedback - education data available from the Agency of Statistics (incl. drop out rates, no. of VET students, no. of VET students continuing to higher levels of education etc.)

23. TORINO PROCESS 2012 – feedback from countries – Turkey STRONG POINTS During TP 2010 and 2012 data collections, detailed data on both education and labour market found (no significant gaps). The data availability overview received from the country confirms such a panorama.

24. TORINO PROCESS 2012 – feedback from countries – Serbia STRONG POINTS During TP 2010 and 2012 data collections, we obtained a quite good coverage of data for both education and labour market (no significant gaps). Data availability received from the country confirms such a panorama. According to the country feedback: LM data are often available also by education level; there are a lot of data for education; data are updated (usually they refer to 2010).

25. TORINO PROCESS 2012 – feedback from countries – Croatia STRONG POINTS During TP 2010 and 2012 data collections, detailed data on labour market indicators found, while some gaps for education data were identified. OPPORTUNITIES According to the country feedback - education data available from the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports (incl. drop out rates, early school leavers, no. of VET students, expenditure on education etc.)

26. TORINO PROCESS 2012 – feedback from countries – Albania STRONG POINTS During the TP 2010 and 2012 data collections, detailed, but not updated, information on labour market and socio-demographic characteristics were found. Education data available (i.e. expenditure on education), although some gaps were identified.

27. Conclusion • More data available than reflected in Torino Process 2010, especially in the field of education; • Gaps still exist – especially for detailed data on VET and adult education; • Sometimes, data are not regularly updated; • Comparability issues – different education classifications are used.

28. CONCLUSION – remaining questions How to improve the data availability? How can the education data which exist in the countries be better used? How to improve the data sharing among institutions? How to learn from each other and cooperate with regard to the data availability?

29. Next Steps • ETF is now engaged in dialogues with all of its partner countries on how national evidence bases can be strengthened and better used for policy making. • The manual is intended as an introduction to indicators and provides a general overview of their use. • We are here to learn from te discussions of country examples

30. Thank you for your attention!