Search

In 2015, for the first time in its history, PISA (the Programme for International Student Assessment) asked teachers to describe the various aspects of their working environment and teaching practices. This paper examines how teacher, student, and school characteristics are related to science teachers' satisfaction in 19 PISA-participating countries and economies. The findings show that the most satisfied science teachers tend to be those who are initially motivated to become teachers. The results also highlight the positive relationship between science teachers' satisfaction and teacher collaboration, good disciplinary climate in science classes, availability of school resources, and the opportunity to participate in professional-development activities.

The combination of work and study has been hailed as crucial to ensure that youth develop the skills required on the labour market so that transitions from school to work are shorter and smoother. This paper fills an important gap in availability of internationally-comparable data. Using the 2012 Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC), it draws a comprehensive picture of work and study in 23 countries/regions. Crucially, it decomposes the total share of working students by the context in which they work (VET [vocational education and training], apprenticeships or private arrangements) and assesses the link between field of study and students' work. The paper also assesses how the skills of students are used in the workplace compared to other workers and identifies the socio-demographic factors and the labour market institutions that increase the likelihood of work and study. Finally, while it is not possible to examine the relationship between work and study and future labour market outcomes at the individual level, some aggregate correlations are unveiled.

This paper presents the first results of a project initiated in 2004 by the OECD in collaboration with Eurostat and the UNESCO Institute for Statistics, and aimed at developing a regular and internationally comparable production system of indicators on the careers and mobility of doctorate holders. A first data collection was launched in September 2005, from which the results for seven countries are presented here. These data shed light on the main demographic, educational, labour market and mobility patterns of doctoral graduates. They also mark some progress in the understanding of both the measurement issues and patterns of international mobility, notably by the use of qualitative indicators such as the intentions or reasons for mobility. The results show in particular that the share of doctorate holders in the population or labour force is two or three times larger in Germany and Switzerland than in Australia, Canada and the United States. In these five countries, women represent only one-quarter to one-third of doctorate holders. The United States has an older population of doctorate holders than the other countries analysed in the paper and this population is still aging, as is also the case in Canada. Unemployment rates of doctorate holders remain low, but are relatively higher in natural sciences and in engineering. There are important salary differences between men and women and across sectors, especially in the United States. In the United States, as well as in Portugal and Argentina, salary is one of the main reasons why doctoral graduates are dissatisfied with their employment situation. There is a high share of foreign doctorate holders in Switzerland and also a higher share of foreign-born doctorate holders in Canada and Australia than in the United States. Many foreigners, however, come to work to the United States having been trained for research abroad and this trend has grown stronger in recent years. On the other hand, very few doctorate holders from the United States are internationally mobile. Among mobile young Canadian citizens, three-quarters choose the United States as their next destination. (Data tables are annexed. Contains 4 footnotes, 13 figures, 1 chart and 35 tables.)

The "Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-Border Higher Education" were developed and adopted to support and encourage international cooperation and enhance the understanding of the importance of quality provision in cross-border higher education. The purposes of the "Guidelines" are to protect students and other stakeholders from low-quality provision and disreputable providers (that is, degree and accreditation mills) as well as to encourage the development of quality cross-border higher education that meets human, social, economic and cultural needs. The "Guidelines" are not legally binding and member countries are expected to implement them as appropriate in their national context. Based on a survey about the main recommendations of the "Guidelines", this report monitors the extent to which Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries and a few non-member countries comply with its recommendations. The Survey was sent out in June 2010 to all OECD countries. The main conclusion of the survey is that (responding) countries report a high level of compliance with the Guidelines recommendations. On average, responding OECD countries conform to 72% of the main recommendations made to governments, tertiary education institutions, and quality assurance and accreditation agencies. The level of compliance decreases to 67% when recommendations to student bodies are included, but the level of missing information, and thus uncertainty about actual compliance, increases significantly. Appended are: (1) Country Overview of Compliance Levels with the Guidelines for Different Stakeholders; (2) Country Overview of Compliance Levels with Six Key Objectives of the Guidelines; (3) Methodology; (4) Country Answers to the Survey; (5) Overview of National Contact Points; and (6) Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-Border Higher Education. (Contains 2 tables, 12 figures and 1 footnote.)

The Teacher Education Study in Mathematics or TEDS-M is a study conducted under the aegis of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). The lead research center for the study is the International Study Center at Michigan State University (ISC/MSU). The ISC/MSU worked from 2006 to 2011 with the International Study Center at the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) and the National Research Coordinators (NRCs) in 17 countries to produce this study. TEDS-M received funding from IEA, the United States of America National Science Foundation, and the collaborating countries. TEDS-M focused on how teachers are prepared to teach mathematics in primary and lower-secondary school, and studied the variation in the nature and impact of teacher education programs within and across countries. TEDS-M is the first cross-national study to provide data on the knowledge that future primary and lower-secondary school teachers have acquired in their mathematics teacher education. The key research questions for the study focused on the relationships between teacher education policies, institutional practices, and future teacher mathematics and pedagogy knowledge. Individual chapters contain figure, tables, footnotes and references. [For related reports, see "TEDS-M 2008 User Guide for the International Database. Supplement 1: International Version of the TEDS-M Questionnaires" (ED542382), "TEDS-M 2008 User Guide for the International Database. Supplement 2: National Adaptations of the TEDS-M Questionnaires" (ED542381), "TEDS-M 2008 User Guide for the International Database. Supplement 3: Variables Derived from the Educator and Future Teacher Data" (ED542385), and "TEDS-M 2008 User Guide for the International Database. Supplement 4: TEDS-M Released Mathematics and Mathematics Pedagogy Knowledge Assessment Items" (ED542384).] [This paper was edited with Maria Teresa Tatto. Contributors include Alena Becker, Ralph Carstens, Jean Dumais, Sabine Meinck, Plamen Mirazchiyski.]

This supplement contains all adaptations made by countries to the international version of the TEDS-M questionnaires under careful supervision of and approval by the TEDS-M International Study Center at Michigan State University. This information provides users of the TEDS-M International Database with a guide to evaluate the availability of internationally comparable data for use in secondary analyses. The adaptations to questionnaires are presented in four sections: Section 1: Institutional Program Questionnaire; Section 2: Educator Questionnaire; Section 3: Future Teacher Questionnaire (Parts A, B, and D); and Section 4: Adaptations to questions about education levels (ISCED classification). Each section contains adaptations specific to individual education systems followed by general or common cultural adaptations and variables. The listed adaptations include questions that countries were required to adapt, questions that were not administered, and questions that countries modified to suit their national context. [For the main report, "TEDS-M 2008 User Guide for the International Database," see ED542383. For related reports, see "TEDS-M 2008 User Guide for the International Database. Supplement 1: International Version of the TEDS-M Questionnaires" (ED542382), "TEDS-M 2008 User Guide for the International Database. Supplement 3: Variables Derived from the Educator and Future Teacher Data" (ED542385), and "TEDS-M 2008 User Guide for the International Database. Supplement 4: TEDS-M Released Mathematics and Mathematics Pedagogy Knowledge Assessment Items" (ED542384).] [This paper was edited with Maria Teresa Tatto.]

Is the United States getting it wrong when it comes to educating tomorrow's innovators in critical fields? It has been known for years that the only way to compete globally in information technology, engineering, nanotechnology, robotics and other fields is to give students the best educational opportunities possible. But do individuals have a successful formula when it comes to science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education? In this report, the authors challenge the nation's approach to STEM education and argue that reforms are urgently needed to better match the talents of students, the needs of employers, and its goals. (Contains 19 tables, 42 figures, and 623 endnotes.) [Funding for this paper was provided by the Intel Corporation. For "Refueling the U.S. Innovation Economy: Fresh Approaches to Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Education. Executive Summary," see ED521736.]

This unit of study, intended for intermediate grade students, focuses on comparing students from different cultures: Germany and the United States. The unit addresses National Social Studies Standards (NCSS) standards; presents an introduction, such as purpose/rationale; cites a recommended grade level; states objectives; provides a time allotment; lists resources needed; delineates procedures; discusses assessment; and suggests extension/enrichment activities. Appended is a student questionnaire (in English and in German), a data display of answers to the questionnaire, and notes for teachers to accompany questionnaire results. (BT)

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.