Search

Taking a gap year--a break between high school and university--is becoming increasingly popular with Australian students. In terms of length and purpose, the traditional notion of a gap year being a year off between school and university has expanded considerably over time. For the purposes of the analysis reported in this paper, a person who takes a gap year is defined as "an individual who commenced university one to two years after completing Year 12. This includes those who accept and defer their university placement for one to two years" (Curtis, Mlotkowski & Lumsden 2012). Highlights of this report include: (1) In Australia the incidence of taking a gap year has increased from 10% in the period 1999-2000 to 24% in 2009-10; (2) The top four primary activities undertaken by gap students in 2009-10 were work (51%), full-time study leading to a non-university qualification (10%), other study (6%), and travel (6%); (3) Characteristics of gap-takers include: (a) being academically less inclined than non-gap-takers; (b) living in regional locations when at school; (c) having English speaking backgrounds; (d) being employed when in Year 12 at school; and (e) being less likely to receive Youth Allowance payments while at school; (4) In their first year of university, gap-takers are more likely to study in the areas of education and creative arts; and (5) Those who don't take a gap year are substantially more likely at age 24 to be employed full-time and to work in professional occupations than gap-takers. Much of this difference can be attributed to the fact that, in terms of their careers, gap-takers are a year or two behind those who don't take a gap year. The data do not allow the authors to measure the longer-term outcomes of both groups because the Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth (LSAY) stops at age 25. Appended are: (1) Gap year definitions; and (2) LSAY cohorts sample sizes and durations. (Contains 13 tables.) [For "Bridging the Gap: Who Takes a Gap Year and Why? Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth. Research Report," see ED533077.]

This report reviews the use of loans for learning in 33 European countries and analyses the schemes in eight selected Member States: France, Hungary, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Finland, Sweden and the UK. The analysis shows that loan schemes vary considerably across Europe in terms of types and levels of learning covered, conditions of access, repayment and governance. Some loans aim to increase participation in learning in general, while others are designed to promote equity. The report attempts to assess the selected loans and discusses their strengths and weaknesses and determinants of performance, while considering if a given scheme operates on a large scale or targets niche groups. The evaluation results provide a basis for identifying good practice principles for designing and implementing loans. Policy recommendations are formulated based on these findings. Annexed are: (1) Methodology; (2) Key terms and definitions; (3) Information on countries/schemes selected for in-depth analysis; (4) Proposed typologies of VET loan schemes; (5) Tables and figures; (6) Tosmana truth tables; (7) Questionnaires; (8) Basic characteristics of non-European loan schemes. (Contains 37 tables, 5 figures, 20 boxes and 33 footnotes.)

The question of whether inequality in skills explains inequality of earnings across advanced countries was examined through a review of data from the International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS), which examined the prose, document, and quantitative literacy skills of adults in 12 member countries of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. In all countries, jobless individuals tended to have lower skill levels than workers. The distribution of earnings and the distribution of skills varied widely among advanced countries, with the major English-speaking countries, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada, having much greater inequality in both earnings and skills than continental European Union countries. According to data from the IALS, skill inequality explains only approximately 7% of the cross-country difference in earnings inequality. The dispersion of earnings in the United States was found to be larger in narrowly defined skill groups than was the dispersion of earnings for European workers overall. In the United States, IALS test scores rose substantially with movement up the income scale, with the increase in scores averaging 17 points per income quintile. The bulk of cross-country differences in earnings inequality were found to occur within skill groups rather than between them. (The bibliography contains 20 references. Twelve tables/figures are included.) (MN)

This combination report/guide summarizes practical "how-to" information on the development and operation of national training boards that was gathered in a series of case studies of the effectiveness of national training boards in Canada, Singapore, Sweden, and the United Kingdom and in studies of training boards in Australia, Brazil, Colombia, Germany, and South Africa. The introductory chapter describes the research on which the guide is based, discusses common themes affecting the quality of training in the countries studied, and examines the rationale for training programs. Chapter 2 summarizes the subsequent discussion of the effectiveness of national training boards in the form of a checklist and guidelines for use by countries considering establishing a national training board. Chapters 3-9 synthesize research findings into practical recommendations dealing with the following aspects of initiating and operating national training boards: enabling legislation, training board composition, training board structure, financial resources, delivery of training, institutional planning and operations, and testing and certification. Chapters 10 and 11, which are more analytical than the chapters preceding them, examine the perception and images of national training boards and lessons learned from the case studies. Contains 59 references. (MN)

This paper looks at the state of education in knowledge management (KM). It reports findings from a study of knowledge management courses included in the curriculum of academic disciplines of business, computing, and information that was conducted at the Nanyang Technological University (Singapore). Based on a review of course descriptions selected from Web sites of universities in Australia, Canada, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the United States, the paper describes levels of courses, curriculum areas and topics, and differences in emphasis in teaching KM courses in different departments and schools. A table presents data on the details of KM courses for each university, including the school/department, course title, level, and academic program. A second table lists topics in KM courses for several curriculum areas, including foundations, technology, process (codification), applications, and strategies. (MES)

Taking a break between completing high school and entering university is common overseas, and is becoming more popular in Australia. There are many reasons why young people take a gap year. It may be to travel, to take a break, to study, or to work. The authors' definition of a "gapper" is a young person who commenced university one to two years after completing Year 12. While the concept of a gap year is related to the deferral of a university offer, it is different. Some gappers have deferred, others decide to enrol during their gap year, not beforehand. Similarly, some who defer a university offer subsequently do not take up a place and are thus not defined as gappers. This report was prepared for the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations in 2009 prior to the Australian Government's announcement of proposed changes to Youth Allowance as an initiative in the 2009-10 Budget and the subsequent reforms based on recommendations from the "Review of Student Income Support Reforms" (Dow 2011). The research uses data from three cohorts of the Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth (LSAY) to throw light on the incidence of gap-taking, the characteristics of those taking a gap year, the activities undertaken in the gap years, and subsequent study and employment outcomes. The report also looks at whether there is any evidence that young people were taking a gap year in order to qualify for Youth Allowance payments. This report reveals that: (1) The incidence of gap-taking has increased and it is estimated that around 20% of Australian students who complete high school will take a gap year; (2) Gap-takers tend to be weaker academically, with lower-than-average tertiary entrance rank (TER) scores, lower than average Year 9 mathematics achievement, and less favourable attitudes to school. In addition to academic factors, young people from English speaking backgrounds and from regional locations are more likely to take a gap year. Students who do not receive Youth Allowance payments while at school (and thus who were from higher socioeconomic status families) are also more likely to take a gap year; (3) The most common activities of Australian gap students are work (40%) and study or training (33%), with only 3% reporting travel as their main activity; (4) It appears that relatively few took a gap year principally to qualify for Youth Allowance: four out of 69 who deferred a university place gave "needing to qualify for Youth Allowance" as a reason for their deferral; and (5) The university completion rates of "gappers" are a little lower than "non-gappers". Appended are: (1) Variables and methods; and (2) Supplementary tables. (Contains 25 tables and 15 footnotes.) [For "Who Takes a Gap Year and Why? Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth. Briefing Paper 28," see ED533076.]

This 22-country survey was conducted between 1994 and 1998. Representative samples of adults aged 16-65 were interviewed and tested at home using the same literacy tests. The main purpose of the survey was to find out how well adults use information to function in society. Another aim was to investigate the factors that influence literacy proficiency and to compare these between countries. Ten international indicators are presented that allow readers to compare the literary proficiency of Americans with that of other populations as measured on the prose literary scale; similar results are provided in quantitative scales. The findings confirm how low literacy is an important issue in all regions in all countries surveyed. On the whole, the findings show that Americans are at an average level of prose literacy performance, behind the Nordic countries and the Netherlands but on a par with adults in Australia, Canada, and Germany. Literacy proficiency is more unequally distributed in the United States and Canada than in Europe, with the most literate 25% of North Americans scoring far higher than average. "Life-long" learning programs, as well as early childhood education, more access to adult education and to information and communication technologies, and the promotion of literacy-rich environments at work, home, and in the community are proposed as solutions to improve adult literacy. The paper is divided into 3 chapters, 4 annexes, and 10 data-rich figures. (Adjunct ERIC Clearinghouse for ESL Literacy Education) (KFT)

Countless policy makers and researchers have flocked to observe the education systems of Hong Kong, Shanghai and Singapore, which are among the top five performers in the PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) 2009 reading assessment. Many visitors have been particularly impressed by the fact that these education systems succeed in embracing the social heterogeneity in their student populations that is intrinsic to large urban environments--something that many other education systems struggle to achieve. But large cities do not just pose social challenges to educators; they also offer important advantages for schools, such as a richer cultural environment, a more attractive workplace for teachers, more school choice, and better job prospects that can help to motivate students. New analyses from PISA highlight these advantages, showing that, in several countries, students from urban areas (defined here as cities with over a million inhabitants) do as well as students in PISA's top performing city-states, even if the different push and pull factors of urban environments play out very differently across countries. This paper reports that: (1) Large cities are generally educational assets: in most countries, performance improves dramatically when only the scores of students in urban areas are considered, although this is not the case in some countries, such as Belgium, Slovenia, the United Kingdom and the United States; and (2) When comparing the performance of students in large cities, students in Portugal and Israel perform as well as those in Singapore, and students in Poland perform as well as those in Hong Kong.

This paper reports that between 2008 and 2009, unemployment rates across OECD countries increased among people at all educational levels, but rose to especially troubling heights among people without an upper secondary education. In 2009, the average employment rate across OECD countries was much higher for individuals with a tertiary (i.e. higher) education--indicating a better match between the skills these people have and the skills the labour market required. Between 2008 and 2009, the earnings advantage for people with a tertiary education remained strong in OECD countries. In some countries, earnings inequality between people with a tertiary education and those without an upper secondary education widened even further.

This document reviews how performance indicators are currently being used in several Commonwealth countries the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada, and identifies some of the issues associated with performance indicator development and application. It also examines whether there are any agreed upon "key", or common, indicators that can be applied universally. After briefly discussing the background of the study and defining the terminology of, the audiences for, and applications of performance indicators, the paper reviews sources of higher education data published by government, government agencies, or national university organizations, and discusses developments in the application of performance indicators. Case studies from the U.K., Australia, and Canada are used to examine five types of indicators: student indicators, such as population, progression/completion rates, destination and satiation; staff indicators; resource and financial indicators; research indicators; and estate management/physical resources indicators. The characteristics of "good" indicators and various concerns surrounding the use of indicators are also addressed. Findings suggest that performance indicators need to be related to institution objectives, should be used with other measures, and cannot presently be used to compare institutions in different countries. Appendices include lists of sources, publications, and contacts; a comprehensive list of possible indicators, and core indicators recommended by the Council of Ontario Universities. (BF)