Search

Digital technologies are increasingly present in young children's lives. How can early education systems get the best out of digitalisation while minimising its risks? This is especially urgent as the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated our reliance on digital tools -- tools that enabled young children to continue learning when early education centres and primary schools closed down. It is in this context that the OECD conducted a policy survey covering 34 countries and jurisdictions. It investigates how digital technologies were used to provide distance education for young children in 2020, which challenges arose and what policy changes are in the pipeline for early education. [The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia provided financial support for this report.]

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.

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.]

Differences in teacher quality are commonly cited as a key determinant of the huge international student performance gaps. However, convincing evidence on this relationship is still lacking, in part because it is unclear how to measure teacher quality consistently across countries. We use unique international assessment data to investigate the role of teacher cognitive skills as one main dimension of teacher quality in explaining student outcomes. Our main identification strategy exploits exogenous variation in teacher cognitive skills attributable to international differences in relative wages of nonteacher public sector employees. Using student-level test score data, we find that teacher cognitive skills are an important determinant of international differences in student performance. Results are supported by fixed-effects estimation that uses within-country between-subject variation in teacher skills.

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.

This paper looks at the importance of mechanisms that give formal recognition to vocational skills acquired through work-based learning and how such mechanisms might be developed. It describes how skill recognition can benefit individuals, employers and society as a whole, and identifies in which contexts skill recognition has the highest potential to bring benefits. The focus is on three tools that are commonly used to shorten the path to a formal qualification: admission into a programme, reduced programme duration and qualification without a mandatory programme. For each of these tools, this paper sets out country approaches, discusses common challenges that arise in their implementation and advances policy messages to support policy design and implementation.

Rapid technological advances can have an impact on personal, social and professional development. Implications for education include changes in the demand for knowledge and skills as well as expanding possibilities for teaching and learning.

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.

Over the past century, technological development and better access to services has resulted in significant improvements to quality of life. Despite this, however, levels of stress, anxiety and depression are rising. Education can play a role in supporting well-being during and beyond schooling. Schools are increasingly concerned not only with students' academic performance but also with students' well-being. Educators refer to this as the need to develop a "whole child" perspective in education, with a balanced focus on cognitive, social, and emotional skills (OECD, 2015b). This is important for a number of reasons: Students with higher levels of well-being tend to have better self-esteem, more satisfaction with their schools and life, and healthier relationships with others (Park, 2004). The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD's) 2015 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) reveals a positive relationship between sense of belonging at school, satisfaction with life and academic performance (OECD, 2017).

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.]

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.

In this study, we investigated how empirical indicators of test-taking engagement can be defined, empirically validated, and used to describe group differences in the context of the Programme of International Assessment of Adult Competences (PIAAC). The approach was to distinguish between disengaged and engaged response behavior by means of response time thresholds. Constant thresholds of 3000 ms and 5000 ms were considered, as well as item-specific thresholds based on the visual inspection of (bimodal) response time distributions (VI method) and the proportion correct conditional on response time (P+>0% method). Overall, the validity checks comparing the proportion correct of engaged and disengaged response behavior by domain and by item showed that the P+>0% method performed slightly better than the VI method and the methods assuming constant thresholds. The results for Literacy and Numeracy by module revealed that there was an increase from Module 1 to Module 2 in the proportion of disengaged responses, suggesting a drop in test-taking engagement. The investigation of country differences in test-taking engagement by domain using the P+>0% method showed that the proportion of responses classified as disengaged was quite low. For Literacy, the proportion was well below 5% for the majority of countries; in Numeracy, the proportion was even smaller than 1% for almost all countries; while for Problem solving, the proportion of disengaged responses was more than 5% but usually well below 10%. There were significant differences in test-taking engagement between countries; the obtained effect sizes were small to medium. Population differences in test-taking engagement were highly correlated between the three domains, suggesting that test-taking engagement can be conceived as a consistent characteristic. Furthermore, there was a clear negative association between test-taking disengagement and proficiency in Literacy, Numeracy and Problem solving, respectively. Finally, subgroup differences for gender, age, educational attainment, and language proved to be insignificant or very small. Results suggest that males tend to be more disengaged, that disengagement increases with age in Problem solving, with lower educational attainment and when the test language is not the same as a testee's native language. Appended are: (1) Country differences in test-taking engagement; and (2) Subgroup differences in test-taking engagement.

Using the 2012 PIAAC data, our analysis confirms that there are significantly higher earnings and employment returns to "both" increasing levels of formally recognised education, and to increasing levels of numeracy, literacy and information and communication technologies (ICT) skills proficiencies controlling for the level of education. Unsurprisingly, the labour market returns to changes in formally recognised levels of education in general exceed the labour market returns associated with increasing levels of skills proficiency. In the case of literacy and numeracy proficiencies, improved literacy and numeracy skills narrow the labour market outcomes gap between individuals with different levels of formally recognised education, but do not close it completely. The analysis demonstrates more substantial returns to ICT skills. Furthermore, possession of higher levels of ICT skills and lower levels of formally recognised qualification are often associated with higher returns compared to individuals with higher levels of formally recognised education but lower ICT proficiency levels. In other words, ICT skills proficiencies often entirely compensate for lower formally recognised qualifications in the labour market. Contains the following annexes: (1) Country Literacy and Numeracy Profiles; and (2) Demographic Control Variables.

The Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC) has been planned as an ongoing program of assessment. The first cycle of the assessment has involved two "rounds." The first round, which is covered by this report, took place over the period of January 2008-October 2013. The main features of the first cycle of PIAAC are: (1) Skills assessed; (2) Other information on skills; (3) Test delivery; and (4) Adaptive testing. The following contents are included in this report: Section 1: Assessment and Instrument Design: (1) Assessment Design (Irwin Kirsch and Kentaro Yamamoto); (2) The Development of the PIAAC Cognitive Instruments (Mary Louise Lennon and Claudia Tamassia); The Development of the PIAAC Background Questionnaires (Jim Allen, Rolf van der Velden, Susanne Helmschrott, Silke Martin, Natascha Massing, Beatrice Rammstedt, Anouk Zabal, and Matthias von Davier); and (4) Translation, Adaptation, and Verification of Test and Survey Materials (Andrea Ferrari, Laura Wayrynen, Dorothée Behr and Anouk Zabal). Section 2: Platform Development: (5) Development of the Cognitive Items (Britta Upsing, Frank Goldhammer, Maya Schnitzler, Robert Baumann, Roland Johannes, Ingo Barkow and Heiko Rölke, Isabelle Jars, Thibaud Latour, Patrick Plichart, Raynald Jadoul, Christopher Henry, and Mike Wagner; (6) Development of Technical Support Tools (Britta Upsing, Frank Goldhammer, Maya Schnitzler, Robert Baumann, Roland Johannes, Ingo Barkow, Heiko Rölke, Isabelle Jars, Thibaud Latour, Patrick Plichart, Raynald Jadoul, Christopher Henry, and Mike Wagner; (7) Development of the CAPI Questionnaire Software (Thibaud Latour, Raynald Jadoul, and Mike Wagner); (8) Development of the Integrated Computer Platform (Britta Upsing, Frank Goldhammer, Maya Schnitzler, Robert Baumann, Roland Johannes, Ingo Barkow, Heiko Rölke, Isabelle Jars, Thibaud Latour, Patrick Plichart, Raynald Jadoul, Christopher Henry, and Mike Wagner); (9) The TAO platform (Raynald Jadoul, Patrick Plichart, Jérôme Bogaerts, Christophe Henry, Thibaud Latour, and Henri Tudor). Section 3: Field Operations and Quality Control: (10) Field operations (Pat Montalvan and Michael Lemay); (11) Quality Control Monitoring Activities (Pat Montalvan and Michael Lemay); (12) Scoring Reliability Studies Claudia Tamassia, Mary Louise Lennon and Kentaro Yamamoto); (13) Data Management Procedures (Ralph Carstens and Tim Daniel). Section 4: Sampling and Weighting: (14) Sampling design (Leyla Mohadjer, Tom Krenzke and Wendy Van de Kerchove); (15) Survey Weighting and Variance Estimation Leyla Mohadjer, Tom Krenzke and Wendy Van de Kerchove); (16) Indicators of the Quality of the Sample Data (Leyla Mohadjer, Tom Krenzke and Wendy Van de Kerchove). Section 5: Data Analysis and Data Products: (17) Scaling PIAAC Cognitive Data (Kentaro Yamamoto, Lale Khorramdel and Matthias von Davier); (18) Scaling Outcomes (Kentaro Yamamoto, Lale Khorramdel and Matthias von Davier); (19) Proficiency Scale Construction (Kentaro Yamamoto, Lale Khorramdel and Matthias von Davier); (20) Creating Simple and Complex Derived Variables and Validation of Background Questionnaire Data (Matthias von Davier, Jonathan Weeks, Henry Chen,Jim Allen and Rolf van der Velden); (21) PIAAC Proficiency Scales Claudia Tamassia and Mary Louise Lennon); (22) Generating Results for PIAAC (Alfred Rogers and John Barone); (23) International Database and Data Analysis Tools (Ralph Carstens, Tim Daniel, and Eugenio Gonzalez). The following are appended: (1) PIAAC main study item pool characteristics; (2) Contrast coding used in conditioning; (3) Design effect tables; (4) Changes to questionnaire items from IALS to PIAAC; (5) Mapping of ISCED levels to years of schooling; (6) PIAAC Consortium, staff, Expert Groups, National Project Managers and consultants; and (7) Data Adjudication in PIAAC (PIAAC Consortium and William Thorn, OECD). (Individual chapters contain references.)

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.)