Search

The number of countries that regularly participate in international large-scale assessments has increased sharply over the past 15 years, with the share of countries participating in the Programme for International Student Assessment growing from one-fifth of countries in 2000 to over one-third of countries in 2015. What accounts for this increase? This paper explores the evidence for three broad explanations: globalization of assessments, increasing technical capacity for conducting assessments, and increased demand for the microeconomic and macroeconomic data from these assessments. Data were compiled from more than 200 countries for this analysis, for six time periods between 2000 and 2015, yielding more than 1,200 observations. The data cover each country's participation in each of six cycles of PISA as it relates to the country's level of economic development, region, prior experience with assessment, and OECD membership. The results indicate that the odds of participation in PISA are markedly higher for OECD member countries, countries in the Europe and Central Asia region, high- and upper-middle-income countries, and countries with previous national and international assessment experience; the paper also finds that regional assessment experience is unrelated to PISA participation.

Early years are a critical period for skill development. In this sense, the Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) programmes have an important role in promoting children's learning during this period. This study aimed to explore the effectiveness of ECEC programmes by analysing the relationship between students' ECEC attendance and their later academic proficiency using PISA 2015 data. PISA results show that across the OECD countries, students who had attended ECEC tend to have higher scores in academic proficiencies at the age of 15. However, these differences in academic proficiencies between those who attended ECEC versus those who did not attend are almost nil when students' socio-economic status (SES) is considered. This relationship reflects differential access to learning opportunities for children from deprived contexts. Furthermore, results show that entering ECEC programmes earlier than the typical time is associated with lower proficiencies at the age of 15. Therefore, earlier entry to ECEC is not necessarily beneficial. Learning benefits of ECEC provision vary considerably across PISA countries illustrating the importance of a country-specific policy context and the quality of their ECEC provision. The analyses of several quality indicators point out that the improved quality of ECEC programmes is associated with higher academic skills at later stages. These results highlight that mere attendance to ECEC programmes is not enough to ensure better academic performance. The quality of the educational provision, especially concerning those students from disadvantaged backgrounds, should be ensured.

The field of higher education studies has expanded dramatically in recent years. Notably, research centers/institutes and academic programs devoted to the field of higher education (tertiary education) has increased worldwide to now include peer-reviewed journals, books, reports and publications. Utilizing secondary data from 277 higher education programs, 217 research centers/institutes, and 280 journals and publications from "Higher Education: A Worldwide Inventory of Research Centers, Academic Programs, and Journals and Publications" (2014), this paper examines the policy actors and scholars engaged in higher education studies across 48 countries. The finding of this study suggests that people living the world's wealthiest countries occupies a position of significant privilege and power with regards to access to higher education research, analysis, and trained human capital. As higher education research centers, programs, and journals around the world expand their understanding of their place in a wider global network of similar entities, supporting one another and particularly under-resourced colleagues around the world deserves increasing attention. [For the complete Volume 17 proceedings, see ED596826.]

This paper and the four commissioned works on which it is based are guided by the important question: How can we start valuing practices and outcomes of teaching and learning that are difficult to reduce to numbers? As the process of developing indicators for the Post-2015 education targets unfolds, some of the targets are at risk of being dropped on account of being 'un-measurable.' However, excluding more holistic but harder to assess educational targets will inevitably remove vital focus from some of the most important aspects of high quality education provision. Three education targets, developed by the Education for All Steering Committee (EFA-SC) and the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development of the U.N. General Assembly (OWG), are the thematic foci of this paper: (1) Relevant Learning Outcomes; (2) Knowledge, Values, Skills, and Attitudes to Establish Sustainable and Peaceful Societies; and (3) Teachers and Safe, Inclusive, and Effective Learning Environments. These three targets are at risk of being excluded from the final formulation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in response to practical concerns about the number of targets being excessive as well as concerns that targets such as these "rely too much on vague, qualitative language rather than hard, measurable, time-bound, quantitative targets." This report also highlights some of the main ideas put forward by the authors of the four commissioned papers. The annex to this document briefly describes the commissioned papers and presents the indicators proposed by the authors. [For the commissioned papers, see "Capturing Quality, Equity & Sustainability: An Actionable Vision with Powerful Indicators for a Broad and Bold Education Agenda Post-2015" (ED610009), "Goals and Indicators for Education and Development: Consolidating the Architectures" (ED609905), "Indicators for a Broad and Bold Post-2015 Agenda: A Comprehensive Approach to Educational Development" (ED609982), and "Indicators for All? Monitoring Quality and Equity for a Broad and Bold Post-2015 Global Education Agenda" (ED609988).]

The purpose of this paper is to review recent developments related to the development of indicators of educational progress in the context of the Post 2015 deliberations to generate a new international architecture for educational investment through to 2030. There have been a plethora of suggestions and several parallel consultation processes since 2012 to revise and replace the goals for education and development agreed at the World Education Forum in Dakar (UNESCO, 2000) and enshrined in the Millennium Development Goals (United Nations, 2000). This process is now converging on the two frameworks that are the subject of this analysis. Specifically, there are now seven goals that the Education for All Steering Committee has developed which were consolidated in the May 2014 Muscat Agreement (UNESCO, 2014); and the ten goals produced by the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development of the U.N. General Assembly (UN General Assembly, 2014). These goal statements overlap and are largely consistent with each other but contain some significant differences. This paper reconciles the differences and develops sets of possible indicators building on the work of the Indicators Technical Advisory Group (TAG-EFA, 2014) and the UN Statistical Commission (UNSC, 2014). The paper is organized in six parts. Part 1 analyses the strengths and weaknesses of the existing goals and targets for education and development to frame subsequent discussion in the context of the evolution of Education for All since 1990. Part 2 offers a necessary clarification of the relationship between goals and objectives, and targets and indicators. Part 3 reviews and discusses the process of developing indicators that are fit for purpose. Part 4 highlights characteristics of different types of indicator. Part 5 develops a list of preferred goal statements from the Muscat Agreement and OWG goals, links these to a discussion of existing and proposed indicators, and consolidates promising indicators that could be used to assess progress. The last part of the paper collects together forward looking conclusions that profile key issues that will shape how new indicators are devised to monitor the sustainable development goals for education.