Public education: A world perspective

1
Public education A world perspective

• Barry McGawOrganisation for Economic
  Co-operation and Development (OECD)
• Optimism and resilience in a global community
• 2002 Victorian Primary Principals
  AssociationAnnual Conference for Educational
  Leaders
• Melbourne
• 4-6 August 2002
• Public education in a globalised world
• 2002 Australian Secondary School Principals
  Association Conference
• Melbourne
• 11-13 August 2002

2
Outline of presentation

• Returns to investment in education
• Increased demand for education
• Demand for increased quality
• How is Australia doing?
• the OECD PISA story
• Changing shape of public education

3
There are clear private returns to investment in
education.
4
Wage premia for university degree
Source Education at a Glance 2001, Table E5.1,
p.303
5
There are clear social returns to investment in
education.
6
An increase of one year in the average
educational attainment of a country would raise
per capita GDP by between 4 and 7 per cent.
In OECD countries, between the 1980s and the
1990s, investment in human capital

• was one of the most powerful engines of economic
  growth.

• had, on average, an impact larger than that of
  physical investment.

7
growth is not the result of a single policy...,
but of a comprehensive and co-ordinated set of
actions... . This depends more than ever on
improving the quality of human capital and
responding to the changing demands of the
workplace and society more broadly. OECD, The
New Economy Beyond the Hype, 2001, p.97
8
Countries want more education.
Education is a priority for heads of government
these days, not just Ministers for Education

• Prime Minister Blairs top three priorities -
  education, education, education.

• President Bushs first domestic legislation - the
  No Child Left Behind education bill.

9
GDP per capita in OECD countries
Source Education at a Glance 2001, Table X2.1,
p.335
10
of GDP on education - public
Source Education at a Glance 2001, Table B2.1a,
p.80
11
of GDP on education - total
Source Education at a Glance 2001, Table B2.1a,
p.80
12
Individuals want more education.
13
Upper secondary completion rates (1999)
Source Education at a Glance 2001, Table A2.2a,
p.45
14
Higher education completion rates
Source OECD (2001) Education at a Glance 2001,
Table A2.2b, p.46
15
Individuals and countries want more education.
They also want better education.
And they want evidence of quality.
16
OECDs evidence on quality Programme for
International Student Assessment (PISA)
17
About the capacity of young adults to use written
information effectively
To analyse, compare, contrast, and evaluate
To think imaginatively
Literacy in PISA
To apply knowledge in real-life situations
To communicate thoughts and ideas effectively
18
Mathematical literacy Recognising, formulating
and solving mathematical problems in everyday
life. Analysing, reasoning and communicating in
mathematical terms
Reading Literacy Using, interpreting and
reflecting on written material
Scientific Literacy Using scientific knowledge,
identifying scientific questions, and drawing
evidence-based conclusions to understand and make
decisions about the natural world
19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
Reading literacy results
Source OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for
life First results from PISA 2000, Fig. 2.4, p.53
22
Reading literacy Retrieving information
Source OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for
life First results from PISA 2000, Table 2.2a,
p.250
23
Reading literacy Interpreting texts
Source OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for
life First results from PISA 2000, Table 2.2b,
p.251
24
Reading literacy Reflection and evaluation
Source OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for
life First results from PISA 2000, Table 2.2c,
p.252
25
Mathematical literacy results
Source OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for
life First results from PISA 2000, Fig. 3.2, p.79
26
Scientific literacy results
Source OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for
life First results from PISA 2000, Fig. 3.5, p.88
27
at each reading proficiency level
Level 5
Level 4
Level 3
Level 2
Level 1
Below Level 1
Source OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for
life, Appendix B1, Table 2.1a, p.246
28
Relationship between mean and spread
Quality above OECD ave Equity above OECD ave
Quality above OECD ave Equity below OECD ave
Quality below OECD ave Equity above OECD ave
Quality below OECD ave Equity below OECD ave
r -0.04
Source OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for
life, Appendix B1, Table 2.3a, p.253
29
Average gender differences
Reading literacy
Mathematical literacy
Scientific literacy
Source OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for
life, Appendix B1, Table 5.1a, p.276
30
Dealing with gender differences

• Deeply embedded in culture?
• probably
• boys value academic less than girls
• Too difficult to shift?
• that is what was said about the problem of
  girls education 10-20 years ago
• the success with girls proves what can be done

31
Social background and performance
High performance
Each 20,000 students in the OECD area are
represented by one dot in this diagram
Student performance in PISA
Social background is a powerful
factorinfluencing student performance(Parental
occupation, wealth, cultural resources, parental
education, family structure, immigrant
status) But poor performance does not
automatically follow
High
Low
PISA Index of social background
Source OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for
life, Appendix B1, Table 8.1, p.308
32
Social background and performance
High performance
Australia
Student performance in PISA
The strength of the socio-economic impact on
student performance differs markedly across
countries
High
Low
PISA Index of social background
Source OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for
life, Appendix B1, Table 8.1, p.308
33
Broad conclusions from PISA

• Countries vary in
• average quality of learning
• extent of variation among students
• extent of gender differences
• relationship of social background to achievement
• Conclusions for schooling
• quality and equity can be achieved together
• impact of social privilege can be ameliorated

34
What everyone wants to know is how to do better.
35
One fairly clear answer from PISA

• comprehensive systems are superior.

• streamed systems accentuate individual
  differences and produce low average performances.

36
Variation in student performance
Variation within schools
Source OECD (2001) Knowledge and skills for
life First results from PISA 2000, Fig. 2.6, p.61
37
Directions of current major reform efforts

• Focus on outcomes
• specifying expectations
• monitoring performance levels
• systems
• individual students
• schools
• Devolving responsibility for process to schools
• Increasing choice for students/parents
• increasing student mobility
• removing zoning
• having funds follow student choices
• reducing distinction between public and private

38
Distinguishing government and private
39
primary secondary students by school type
Australia has74.8 in public schools25.2 in
govt-dependent private schoolsessentially none
in independent private schools
Korea has78.3 in public schools21.0 in
govt-dependent private schools0.7 in
independent private schools
Finland has96.2 in public schools3.8 in
govt-dependent private schoolsessentially none
in independent private schools
The UK has65.1 in public schools30.7 in
govt-dependent private schools4.2 in
independent private schools
The USA has89.3 in public schoolsessentially
none in govt-dependent private schools10.7 in
independent private schools
The Netherlands has23.3 in public
schools76.3 in govt-dependent private
schools0.5 in independent private schools
Source Education at a Glance 2001, Table C1.4,
p.136
40
Some examples

• Finland
• almost all schools are public schools
• government-dependent private schools receive same
  funding as public schools
• USA
• categories of schools
• public schools owned by school districts
• independent schools
• funding
• local and state taxes, with marked variation
  among public schools
• no govt funds for independent schools
• BUT recent Supreme Court decision on vouchers in
  Cleveland allows students to use vouchers in
  independent schools
• considerable experimentation to expand choice
• Charter schools
• vouchers

41
Some examples-2

• UK
• categories of schools
• Community schools LEA employs staff, owns
  facilities
• Voluntary-controlled schools LEA employs staff
• Foundation schools governing body employs staff,
  governing body of charitable foundation owns
  facilities
• Voluntary-aided schools governing body employs
  staff
• Independent schools no govt. financial support
• New types of secondary schools
• City Academies publicly funded, independent
  schools, owned and funded by sponsors who provide
  significant capital funds
• City Technology Colleges industrial and
  commercial sponsors contribute 20 of capital
  funds
• System is in transition

42
Some examples-3

• Netherlands
• freedom for interested groups to form schools
• from mid-19th Century subject to national
  standards
• from 1917 with public funding
• schools based on
• religious affiliation (Catholic, Protestant,
  Jewish, Islamic)
• educational philosophy (Montessori, etc.)
• Level of funding
• all schools receive same level of government
  funding
• some marginal differentiation for students with
  special needs
• fees can be charged
• Issues under debate
• whether wealthy parents can produce resource
  differentiation
• whether schools for new groups impede integration

43
Some examples-4

• Belgium (Flemish) - similar to Netherlands
• constitutional provisions
• freedom of choice of school for parents
• freedom for individuals/groups to establish
  schools
• funding
• all schools can receive public funds
• schools that do may not charge fees
• staff are hired by schools but paid by state
• other funds are transferred to the schools

44
Issues

• Can schools contribute to social cohesion?
• schooling not school is the common experience
• will divided schools reinforce divisions?
• Can equity be achieved together with quality?
• PISA shows some countries achieve the combination
• Will new strategies to achieve quality risk this?
• increasing local control and variation
• increasing private management with public funding
• Will pursuit of equity threaten quality?
• Will resistance to experimentation in name of
  equity lead to levelling down not levelling
  up?

45
And Australia?

• High achieving on average
• Points of potential concern
• relatively large disparities in individual
  results
• relatively small gender differences
• relatively high impact of social advantage on
  achievement
• moderately large differences among schools
• We are close to best on quality but not equity
• Is it a public/private difference?
• the PISA results cannot provide the evidence
• even if it is, why shouldnt individuals be able
  to seek what they consider to be the best?
• The solution has to be levelling up, not down

46
Thank you.
OECD website http//www.oecd.org
PISA website http//www.pisa.oecd.org