html5-img
1 / 45

PISA and INES projects

PISA and INES projects. 22-23 November 2011 Etienne Albiser. PISA 2009 Strong performers and successful reformers. Quality of learning outcomes Equity of learning outcomes Factors that make a difference. Etienne Albiser. PISA 2009 in brief. Over half a million students…

tejano
Download Presentation

PISA and INES projects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PISA and INES projects 22-23 November 2011 Etienne Albiser

  2. PISA 2009Strong performers and successful reformers • Quality of learning outcomes • Equity of learning outcomes • Factors that make a difference Etienne Albiser

  3. PISA 2009 in brief • Over half a million students… • representing 28 million 15-year-olds • in 74 countries/economies (about 87% of world economy) … took an internationally agreed 2-hour test… • Goes beyond testing whether students can reproduce, what they were taught… … to assess students’ capacity to extrapolate from what they know and creatively apply their knowledge in novel situations … and responded to questions on… • their personal background, their schools and • their engagement with learning and school • Parents, principals and system leaders provided data on… • school policies, practices, resources and institutional factors that help explain performance differences. * Data for Costa Rica, Georgia, India, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Venezuela and Vietnam will be published in December 2011

  4. How proficient are students in reading? % 7.4%, similar to OECD average • Students at Level 5 can • handle texts that are unfamiliar in either form or content, • find information in such texts, demonstrate detailed understanding, and infer which information is relevant to the task. • critically evaluate such texts and build hypotheses about them, drawing on specialised knowledge and accommodating concepts that may be contrary to expectations. • Students at Level 1a are capable of • - locating pieces of explicitly stated information that are rather prominent in the text, • recognising a main idea in a text about a familiar topic, a • recognising the connection between information in such a text and their everyday experience. 27%, comparedwith 19% for OECD average

  5. Performance in reading (2009) 539 474 425

  6. Change in reading performance between 2000 and 2009 Reading performance improved Score point change Reading performance declined

  7. Quality of learning outcomes In Israel • Average performance of 15-year-olds is: • Below the OECD average in Reading • Below the OECD average in Maths • Below the OECD average in Science • Trend data on average performance shows: • Between 2000 and 2009 performance in Reading increased significantly (by 22 score points) • No participation in PISA 2003, and no significant change in mean performance in Science between 2006 and 2009

  8. Low degree of equity in schooling outcomes in Israel Overall variation in reading performance is high compared with OECD average (the largest among OECD countries) … Equity of learning outcomes

  9. Variation in reading performance between and within schools

  10. Equity of learning outcomes • Low degree of equity in schooling outcomes in Israel • Overall variation in reading performance is high compared with OECD average (the largest among OECD countries) … • … and there is a large variation in performance between schools compared to other countries • Gender differences similar to OECD average • Girls outperform boys in reading (42 points) • No gender difference in mathematics • No gender difference in science • Relationship between performance and socio-economic background of the students is stronger than the average…

  11. Measures of the relationship between socio-economic background and reading performance Performance gap between the advantaged and the disadvantaged is large compared with OECD average. Much larger than that in Shanghai-China… …but like Shanghai-China, the strength of association between performance and ESCS is similar to the OECD average. About 12-13% of reading performance variation between students explained by differences in their socio-economic background (compared with 14% on average across OECD countries)

  12. Percentage of resilient students among disadvantaged students students who succeed despite social disadvantage Between 15%-30% of resilient students among disadvantaged students More than 30% resilient students among disadvantaged students Less than 15% resilient students among disadvantaged students

  13. What factors make a difference? For the individual student Reading for enjoyment 34% of students in Israel do not read for enjoyment…about the average but strongly related to performance Diversity of reading materials Students in Israel read a similar diversity of material than on average in OECD countries Knowledge of strategies to summarise information Students in Israel are below the OECD average in their knowledge of understanding, remembering and summarising information, but above the OECD average in their knowledge of the use of control strategies And for system and school policies …

  14. What does it all mean?

  15. Lessons from PISA on successful education systems • Commitment to universal education and the belief that competencies can be learned and therefore all children can achieve Universal educational standards and personalisation as the approach to heterogeneity ; Clear articulation who is responsible for ensuring student success and to whom • Clear ambitious goals that are shared across the system and aligned with high stakes gateways and instructional systems Curricular goals translate into instructional systems, instructional practices and student learning (intended, implemented and achieved) • Capacity at the point of delivery Attract develop and retain high quality teachers and school leaders; Instructional leadership and human resource management in schools; Keeping teaching an attractive profession; System-wide career development

  16. Lessons from PISA on successful education systems • Incentives, accountability, knowledge management Aligned incentive structures (for students and teachers), balance between vertical and lateral accountability; Effective instruments to manage and share knowledge and spread innovation; A capable centre with authority and legitimacy to act • Investing resources where they can make most of a difference Alignment of resources with key challenges e.g. attracting the most talented teachers to the most challenging classrooms); Effective spending choices that prioritise high quality teachers over smaller classes • A learning system An outward orientation of the system; Recognising challenges and potential future threats to current success • Coherence of policies and practices Alignment of policies across all aspects of the system; Coherence of policies over sustained periods of time; Consistency of implementation; Fidelity of implementation (without excessive control)

  17. Education Directorate www.oecd.org/edu PISA www.pisa.oecd.org Email: Michael.Davidson@OECD.org Etienne.albiser@oecd.org Further information

  18. INES Methods, data collections and publication (Educationat a Glance) 22-23 November 2011 Etienne Albiser

  19. Indicators of Education Systems(INES) • Decisions/discussions bodies Expert Network NESLI: network for the collection and adjudication of system-level descriptive information on educational structures, policies and practices Expert Network LSO: network for data development on labour-market and social outcomes of education Level 1: Governance and strategic co-ordination EDPC governs INES drawing on advice of Advisory Group elected from EDPC on rotating basis plus members from ELSAC, CERI, PISA, BPCs CERI Governing Board PISAGoverning Board Education Policy Committee Employment, Labour and Social Affairs Committee supported by an INES Advisory Group Manages the basic annual INES data collection Provides technical oversight over respective analysis and publications (EAG) Level 2: Operational Management INES Working Party for the annual INES data collection and Outputs (including Education at a Glance) Level 3: Research, Development, Production

  20. Indicators of Education Systems (INES)Data collections • Joint UNESCO-OECD-Eurostat (UOE) data collection on Education systems • Data on Enrolment, Entrant, Graduates, Class size, Education personnel, Educationexpenditure and ISCED mapping • INES Networks data collections • NESLI network • the OECD data collection on teachers and the curriculum, • LSO network • the OECD data collections on labour market outcomes (NEAC), • transitions from education to work (TRANS), and • Earnings; • Someother non regular data collections

  21. Criteria to select an indicator at the international level • Statistics published at the national level are not always comparable between countries • The criteria used to guide the choice of indicators: • Policy relevance – key measure of one of the cells in the indicator framework • Coherence - can be used together to present a coherent picture of the education systems between countries and available for most countries • Accuracy and credibility - comparably measured across countries • Timeliness - regularly updated • Indicators reviewed by members of INES Working Party and also Education Policy Committee in a priority rating exercice

  22. High policy value Quick wins Must haves Indicators derived from UOE and other established data sources Developmental work in the INES Networks In development, improvement needed Established, high technical standards Indicators derived from UOE and other established data sources Money pits Low-hanging fruits Low policy value

  23. Education at a Glance 2011Key results

  24. Education at a Glance • Education at a Glance 2011 • 495 pages, 29 Indicators, 132 tables, 119 charts • +web only: 1 Indicator and 100 tables • 4 Chapters • Outcomes of education (Chapter A), • Financing (Chapter B) • Participation (Chapter C) • School environment (Chapter D) • Public release: September (2nd Tuesday) • Press conferences: Paris; Brussels; London; Berlin; Mexico • Media coverage: Good coverage in media; BBC; CNN; Economist; etc. • On-line dissemination • Whole book (tables, charts, text) available free • EAG “navigator” tool • Country notes • Simultaneous release of Highlights from Education at a Glance 2010 • Update of the public OECD.stat database with UOE 2010 data

  25. Education at a Glance 2011some results

  26. Expenditure on education is a priorityExpenditure on educational institutions as a percentage of GDP 7.3% of GDP is devoted to education in 2008 (compared with 6.1% for OECD as a whole) But this share has decreased slightly between 2000 and 2008 (-0.3 percentage point), as expenditure on education increased by 21% whereas GDP increased by 29%.

  27. Primary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education

  28. Expenditure per student is still below the OECD average Index of changes between 2000 and 2008 (2000=100, 2008 constant prices), primary, secondary, post-secondary non-tertiary level USD 8 169 USD 5 780

  29. … Despite a large number of instruction hours…Total number of intended instruction hours in public institutions between the ages of 7 and 14 (2009) 6732 hours 7 746 hours

  30. … Despite a smaller number of teaching hours…Net statutory contact time for teachers, in hours per year, in public institutions (2009) Between 80 % and 84 % of the OECD average teaching time at lower and upper secondary

  31. …but because of bigger class sizes…Average class size in primary education (2000, 2009) In 2009 , 27.4 pupils per classroom: 6 more than on average in OECD countries

  32. … And lower than average teachers salaries…Annual statutory teachers’ salaries (minimum, after 15 years experience, and maximum) in public institutions in lower secondary education, in equivalent USD converted using PPPs

  33. …even if teachers’ salaries have increasedLower secondary teachers’ statutory salaries after 15 years of experience/minimum training, index of change between 1995 and 2009 (2005 = 100, constant prices)

  34. Baseline qualifications are more widespread than in most other countriesApproximated by percentage of persons with upper secondary or equivalent qualifications in the age groups 55-64, 45-55, 45-44 and 25-34 years (2009) 81% of 25-64 year-olds 73% of 25-64 year-olds

  35. Tertiary education

  36. University-level qualifications are more prevalent in two other countries onlyPercentage of the population that has attained tertiary-type A education in the age groups 25-34 years and 55-64 years (2009) 45% of 25-64 year-olds 30% of 25-64 year-olds

  37. Expenditure per student is below the OECD average and decreases Index of change between 2000 and 2008 (2000=100, 2008 constant prices), tertiary education USD 12 568 USD 13 718

  38. Below average access to University education Access to tertiary-type A education for upper secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary graduates (2009)

  39. Average relative earnings from employment…Relative earnings from employment by level of educational attainment for 25-to-64 year-olds (upper secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education = 100) (2009 or latest available year)

  40. … and lower than average labour costs…Deviation from the OECD mean in annu al labour costs, by level of education (in USD for 25-64 year-olds)

  41. …As well as below average net incomeNet income in USD for 25-64 year-olds with a tertiary education (2009 or latest year available)

  42. Positive relation between education and employment Percentage of 25-64 year-olds in employment, by level of education (2009) Since the start of the recession in 2007, employment rates did not decreased much in Israel, compared to other OECD countries

  43. When the crisis hitPercentage point change between 2008-09 in unemployment rate for the 25-64 year-olds Unemployment rates in 2009 Below upper secondary attainment: 10.8% in Israel (OECD average of 11.5%) Tertiary attainment: 5.2% in Israel (OECD average of 4.4%)

  44. Further information Education Directorate www.oecd.org/edu Education at a Glance 2011 www.oecd.org/edu/eag2011 Etienne.albiser@oecd.org Eric.Charbonnier@OECD.org

More Related