Search

Intersectionality highlights that different aspects of individuals' identities are not independent of each other. Instead, they interact to create unique identities and experiences, which cannot be understood by analysing each identity dimension separately or in isolation from their social and historical contexts. Intersectional approaches in this way question the common classification of individuals into groups (male vs. female, immigrant vs. native etc.), which raises important implications for the policy-making process. In education, analyses with an intersectional lens have the potential to lead to better tailored and more effective policies and interventions related to participation, learning outcomes, students' attitudes towards the future, identification of needs, and socio-emotional well-being. Consequently, as elaborated in this paper, some countries have adjusted their policies in the areas of governance, resourcing, developing capacity, promoting school-level interventions and monitoring, to account for intersectionality. Gaps and challenges related to intersectional approaches are also highlighted.

Calls for increased monitoring and evaluation of education policies and practices have not, so far, included widespread and consistent assessments of the inclusiveness of education settings. Measuring inclusion in education has proven to be a challenging exercise, due not only to the complexity and different uses of the concept, but also to its holistic nature. Indeed, measuring inclusion implies analysing a variety of policy areas within education systems, while also considering the different roles of the system, the school and the classroom. This paper discusses the application of the input-process-outcome model to the measurement of inclusion in education, and key indicators that can be adopted by education systems and schools to this end. It makes considerations relevant to policy makers when designing indicators to measure inclusion, such as the extent of their application, the constraints related to data disaggregation and the relevance of intersectional approaches to inclusion.

This Report Card offers an assessment of child well-being in the context of sustainable development across 41 countries of the European Union (EU) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Specifically, this report seeks to bring the SDG [Sustainable Development Goal] targets for children in high-income countries into meaningful operation (while staying true to the ambitions of the global agenda) and to establish a point of departure for reviewing the SDG framework in these contexts. It focuses on those goals and targets with most direct relevance to the well-being of children in high-income settings. Where appropriate, it adapts the agreed SDG indicator, the better to reflect the problems facing children in such countries. The results therefore highlight the new challenges set by the SDGs.

Governments recognise that careers guidance, underpinned by accurate labour market information, can help learners make post-secondary education choices that match their interests, aptitudes and abilities, and lead to rewarding employment. For this reason, they have invested in building linked education/employment information systems and other information resources which are displayed on websites targeted to learners and their families. However, researchers and governments agree that these efforts are often ineffective in informing learners' decisions -- access to information is not sufficient to provide effective support to student choice. Drawing upon the insights of behavioural economics, this paper examines how learners access and use information, and what this implies for the design of public study and career choice websites that aim to effectively support student choice. The report also takes stock of the career guidance websites in use in the majority of OECD countries, and sets out to provide actionable advice for policy makers to guide the design of effective information policy levers that support student choice.

On average in OECD countries, private sources account for a significant share of investment in tertiary educational institutions. Private expenditure on tertiary educational institutions increased faster than public expenditure between 2010 and 2016 on average across OECD countries, although this varies from country to country. Participation in tertiary education is not correlated to the funding model in tertiary institutions and high levels of private expenditure at tertiary education are not necessarily associated with lower enrolment. Financial support mechanisms in the form of grants or loans help alleviate the financial burden to households, particularly in countries where private spending on tertiary education is high.

This brochure focuses on a selection of indicators from "Education at a Glance," selected for their particular relevance in the current context. Their analysis enables the understanding of countries' response and potential impact from the COVID-19 containment measures. The following topics are discussed: (1) the impact of the crisis on education, including public financing of education in OECD countries and international student mobility; and (2) COVID-19 and educational institutions, including the loss of instructional time delivered in a school setting, measures to continue students' learning during school closure, teachers' preparedness to support digital learning, when and how to reopen schools, class size, a critical parameter for the reopening of schools, and vocational education during the COVID-19 lockdown.

As the data in this new edition of the Innocenti Report Card series show, in the past five years, rising numbers of children and their families have experienced difficulty in satisfying their most basic material and educational needs. Most importantly, the Great Recession is about to trap a generation of educated and capable youth in a limbo of unmet expectations and lasting vulnerability. League Tables, the flagship tool of the Innocenti Report Card series, rank the change, since the onset of the crisis, in the poverty levels of children and the impact of the recession on youth. The Report also explores the effects of the recession on youth seeking to enter or remain in the labour force in the middle of a recession. [Support for this report was provided by the Government of Italy.]

Good health is a benefit in many domains, such as work, studies or social relationships. Fostering a sound knowledge on healthy habits and the implications of risk-taking behaviours is a key to shaping societies with healthier lifestyles.

At the heart of progressivism is the belief that government--not big government, or small government, but effective government--has a critical role to play in ensuring the well being of its citizens. Public spending serves an important function in pursuing economic growth objectives while ensuring that gains are widely distributed to promote broad-based increases in living standards. But governments' relative fiscal positions, how much they spend, and the composition of that spending is likely to make a difference in achieving these objectives. Member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development--an international organization consisting primarily of developed, free-market economies--vary significantly in (1) their relative fiscal positions, or deficits and surpluses; (2) their amount of public spending; and (3) how they allocate spending across different categories to reflect priorities. This descriptive study examines how OECD countries have addressed the current economic situation through their fiscal balance sheets, and then goes on to consider similarities and differences in public spending across OECD countries through the prism of economic and social objectives. Countries are compared according to three relative measures of government spending: spending as a share of GDP, spending per capita, and spending by category as a percentage of total government expenditure.

Teachers are the most important school resource. In every country, teachers' salaries and training represent the greatest share of expenditure on education; and this investment in teachers can have significant returns. Research shows that being taught by the best teachers can make a real difference in the learning and life outcomes of otherwise similar students. But not all students are equal when it comes to access to high-quality teaching. In fact, PISA data show that there are inequities in access to experienced and qualified teachers in many countries, and that they are related to the gap in learning outcomes between advantaged and disadvantaged students.

While the benefits of early childhood education and care (ECEC) services to better learning are now widely acknowledged, a widespread and accessible provision for these services also helps support gender equality in the workforce. In particular, the availability, intensity, reliability and affordability of ECEC play an important role in engaging women full time in the labour market. While ECEC has experienced a surge of policy attention over the last decades, wide variations still exist across countries and its costs remains a barrier to accessing paid work for poor families and lone parents, mostly mothers. More efforts are needed to increase the provision and accessibility of free ECEC services, especially for children under the age of 3.

PISA 2015 data show that, on average across OECD countries, as many as three out of four students from the lowest quarter of socio-economic status reach, at best, only the baseline level of proficiency (Level 2) in reading, mathematics or science. While in Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hong Kong (China), Ireland, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Slovenia and Viet Nam, more than 30% of disadvantaged students scored at Level 3 or above in all PISA subjects in 2015, and can thus be considered "academically resilient". Students who perform at Level 3 begin to demonstrate the ability to construct the meaning of a text and form a detailed understanding from multiple independent pieces of information when reading. They can work with proportional relationships and engage in basic interpretation and reasoning when solving mathematics problems; and they can handle unfamiliar topics in science. Such skills are the foundations for success and further learning later in life. PISA data collected over a decade (in 2006, 2009, 2012 and 2015) show that several countries have been able to increase the share of academically resilient students among those in the bottom quarter of socio-economic status. [This work was supported by a contribution to the PISA programme of work from Vodafone Germany Foundation.]

Resilience refers to the capacity of individuals to prosper despite encountering adverse circumstances. This paper defines academic resilience as the ability of 15-year-old students from disadvantaged backgrounds to perform at a certain level in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in reading, mathematics and science that enables them to play an active role in their communities and prepares them to make the most of lifelong-learning opportunities. Using data from the most recent PISA cycles, this paper explores changes in the share of resilient students over time (2006-2015); highlights the importance of school environments and resources in mitigating the risk of low achievement for disadvantaged students; and identifies school-level factors that are associated with the likelihood of academic resilience among socio-economically disadvantaged students. Analyses reveal that several countries were able to increase the share of resilient students over time, reflecting improvements in the average performance of students, or a weaker relationship between socio-economic status and performance. In the vast majority of education systems examined, the likelihood of academic resilience among disadvantaged students is lower in schools where students report a negative classroom climate. The paper concludes by exploring school policies and practices that are associated with a positive classroom climate. [This work was supported by a contribution to the PISA programme of work from Vodafone Germany Foundation.]

Across OECD countries, more and more individuals have attained tertiary education and the share of those with less education has declined. Although there are more tertiary-educated individuals than ever before, they still achieve good labour market outcomes. This confirms that labour market demand is generally keeping pace with rising educational attainment. Only in about one-quarter of OECD countries, the employment advantage of tertiary-educated adults over adults with upper-secondary or post-secondary education has declined over the past two decades, which may be a sign that demand for tertiary-educated people is slowing down. Countries also need to address the situation of young men and women who have not completed upper secondary school and who face low employment prospects.

We consider the question whether pupils from the lower social strata perform better in private government-dependent schools than in public or private-independent schools, using the PISA 2000 data on European high schools. In the eighty's, Coleman and Hoffer (1987) found in the USA that the performance of these pupils was better at religious schools than at comparable public schools. Dronkers and Robert (2003) found in PISA-data for 19 comparable countries that private government-dependent schools are more effective then comparable public schools, also after controlled for characteristics of pupils and parents and the social composition of the school. The main explanation appeared to be a better school climate in private government-dependent schools. Private independent schools were less effective than comparable public schools, but only after controlling for the social composition of the school. As a follow-up we now investigate, again with the PISA-data of these 19 countries, whether this positive effect of private government-dependent schools differs between pupils from different strata. We use various indicators to measure social strata: social, cultural and economic. We expect that the thesis of Coleman & Hoffer does hold for private government-dependent schools, because in these 19 countries they are mostly religious schools, which have more opportunities to form functional communities and create social capital. But for private independent schools, which due to their commercial foundation are less often functional communities, this relation is not expected to hold. However, the results show that public and private schools have mostly the same effects for the same kind of pupils and thus mostly not favor one kind of pupils above another kind of pupils. But private government-dependent schools are slightly more effective for pupils with less cultural capital. However, private independent schools are also more effective for pupils from large families or low status families. (Contains 4 tables, 12 notes and a list of 25 Literature Resources .)

Over the past few decades, higher education has become available around the world to a degree unimaginable to earlier generations. In many ways, accessible mass higher education is the foundation of the modern knowledge economy, and without it, the bright futures of many youth around the world would be dimmed. Preserving and enhancing the accessibility of higher education is an issue that confronts governments and stakeholders all over the world. This inaugural edition of the Global Higher Education Rankings is the first systematic and rigorous exploration of the affordability and accessibility of higher education within an international comparative context. The report is effectively divided into four parts following an introduction: methodology, affordability rankings, accessibility rankings, and conclusions. The end of the report also includes individual country reports which profile national results, and two appendices relating to data and indicator scores. The affordability section of this report looks at the complete and high quality data on affordability of higher education in fifteen countries: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States. The accessibility section of the report looks at the relevant, complete data on accessibility of higher education in thirteen countries: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States. Given the difference in national focus and priorities regarding higher education accessibility, data on accessibility is far less open to international comparison than is data on affordability. While there is some clustering, the data and rankings suggest quite strongly that the links between accessibility and affordability are not straightforward. For instance, with the exceptions of Finland and the Netherlands, no country hasconsistently high scores across both the affordability and accessibility rankings. Data Sources and Indicator Scoring/Weightings Sensitivity are appended. (Contains 7 figures and 29 tables.) [This document was published by the Educational Policy Institute. Abstract modified to meet ERIC guidelines.]

This report represents the first ever attempt to draw a comparative picture of the physical abuse of children in the 27 richest nations of the world. UNICEF research estimates that almost 3,500 children under the age of 15 die from physical abuse and neglect every year in the industrialized world. The greatest risk is among younger children. A small group of countries -- Spain, Greece, Italy, Ireland and Norway -- appear to have an exceptionally low incidence of child maltreatment deaths; Belgium, the Czech Republic, New Zealand, Hungary and France have levels that are four to six times higher. The United States, Mexico and Portugal have rates that are between 10 and 15 times higher than those at the top of the league table. The good news is that child deaths from maltreatment appear to be declining in the great majority of industrialized countries.

Innovation is essential for the education sector. The ways in which curriculum decision making is organised reflects different implicit approaches on how educational systems pertain to promote innovation in education. Curriculum holds an outstanding place when seeking to promote innovation in education, as it reflects the vision for education by indicating knowledge, skills and values to be taught to students. It may express not only "what" should be taught to students, but also "how" the students should be taught. Curriculum innovations can include new subjects, combinations of old subjects or cross-cutting learning objectives. They may also take a form of new content, concepts, sequencing, time allocation or pedagogy. This paper characterises two contrasted approaches to curriculum decision making and bringing about innovations in education. At one extreme, a prescriptive central curriculum implicitly places the initiative for educational innovations at the level of the central administration. This approach provides strong incentives for schools and teachers to adapt innovations that would not otherwise take place. Innovations, supported by policy measures and informed by research, are brought within the reach of all schools and teachers in an equitable manner. The challenge is then to accommodate local needs and ensure the commitment to and implementation of innovations by schools and teachers. At the other extreme, decentralised curriculum decision making provides schools--and perhaps even teachers--with room to create their own educational innovations. This approach allows for experimentation relevant to individual students and local communities. Innovations are meant to spread through horizontal networks of schools and teachers. The challenge is then to provide incentives for individual schools and teachers to innovate or adapt innovations and ensure that they have equal capacity to do so. The paper provides an overview of various possible approaches linking curriculum policy to educational innovation, it shows that OECD countries can mix these approaches and it discusses elements that can affect those innovations in reality. Focusing on public lower-secondary education, it draws on various OECD and UNESCO data. First, the paper suggests that OECD education systems differ clearly when looking at formal curriculum decision making, although no system relies on a purely central or school-based approach to curriculum innovations. Second, several elements can reduce the "innovation power" of the central curriculum and the "innovation flexibility" of the decentralised curriculum. Third, stakeholders--such as experts, teachers and parents--are able to influence curriculum innovations differently at central and school levels. Innovations in central-level curriculum appear to have widespread possibilities to rely on expert knowledge with consultation with practitioners, parents and the wider public. School level curriculum innovations appear to build mainly on principals and teachers' knowledge with an indirect influence from experts and parents. Annexed are: (1) Emerging Curriculum Themes in OECD Countries; (2) Approaches to Bringing About Competence-Based Curriculum; (3) Central Level Curriculum in OECD Countries; (4) Details on the Implicit Approaches to Curriculum Innovations; and (5) Roles of Parents in Decision Making on Education Policy. (Contains 13 tables, 4 charts, 5 boxes and 20 notes.)

This literature review on school choice analyses the impact of choice schemes on students and on school systems focusing on equity. Reviewing the evidence can be difficult, as the literature is often fragmented and inconclusive, and the political importance of this research often results in high-profile attention given to individual studies rather than systemically understanding collected from a larger empirical base (Berends, Cannata and Goldring, 2011). Different political groups use evidence that supports their positions in favour or against school choice, and their positions relative to school choice are largely based on their ideologies, rather than on empirical work and evidence of effectiveness (Levin and Belfield, 2004). This report steps away from the ideological debate and provides research-based evidence on the impact of choice on disadvantaged students and schools. As "only with data on the consequences of different plans for school choice will we be able to reach sensible judgements rooted in experience (Fuller and Elmore, 1996, p. 8)". It uses analysis and statements that are supported empirically and attempts to cover the widest possible scope of research, and provide responses to the key question of how to balance choice with equity considerations. (Contains 7 tables, 4 figures, 5 boxes and 13 footnotes.)

Education plays an essential role in preparing the children of immigrants for participation in the labour market and society. Giving these children opportunities to fully develop their potential is vital for future economic growth and social cohesion in OECD countries. But migrant students in most OECD countries tend to have lower education outcomes than their native peers. Extensive previous research has described the system level, school level and individual level factors that influence the education outcomes of migrant students. Building on such previous research, this paper looks at the ways in which "education policies" can influence these factors to help provide better educational opportunities for migrant students. (Contains 7 footnotes.) [This review was prepared for the OECD Thematic Review on Migrant Education. It was presented and discussed at the Second Meeting of the Group of National Experts on the Education of Migrants in Paris on 13-14 October 2008.]