Preventing dropout: Iceland in a comparative perspective Beatriz Pont Sr. Analyst OECD Education OECD-Iceland Workshop 22 November 2011 Reykjavik, Iceland
Today... 3. 2. 1. Addressing dropout An comparative overview of Iceland: strengths and challenges Policy areas for Iceland www.oecd.org/edu/improvingschools 2
Improving schools: The OECD process Starting point Comparative analysis Key actors of reform Country visit Capacity building Final objective Country Specific needs 1. OECD Recommendations 2. Consultation and engagement 3. OECD Seminar for Leaders in Ed Improvement A strategy for implemen tation Review visit Discussing key issues Team work Consensus
An comparative overview of Iceland: strengths and challenges 1.
Different contexts and challenges, but one objective (PISA 2009 reading) Above OECD average Better education Iceland Around OECD average for all students Below OECD average is possible
550 Mean score High performers combine quality with equity Mean performance above OECD average Socio-economic profile below OECD average Korea Mean performance above OECD average Socio-economic profile above OECD average Finland Turkey Macao-China Canada Japan New Zealand Australia Netherlands Belgium Norway Poland Switzerland Hungary France United States Germany Sweden Ireland United Kingdom Denmark Portugal Italy Slovenia Spain Slovak Republic Czech Republic Israel Austria Luxembourg Iceland Mean performance below OECD average Socio-economic profile below OECD average Mean performance below OECD average Socio-economic profile above OECD average 450-1.5-1.0-0.5 0.0 0.5 1 Mean PISA index of social, economic and cultural status
Portugal Turkey Mexico Spain Italy Greece Iceland Chile France Belgium Australia Ireland New Zealand OECD Netherlands United Denmark Luxembourg Korea Hungary Norway Israel Austria Finland Slovenia Germany Sweden Switzerland Canada Poland United States Estonia Slovak Czech But dropout rates in upper secondary are high 70 % 25-64 25-34 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Denmark Iceland Norway Sweden Finland New Zealand Belgium Austria France Netherlands Ireland United States Switzerland United Kingdom Slovenia OECD average Portugal Poland Estonia Hungary Canada Mexico Greece Australia Germany Italy Spain Korea Czech Republic Chile Slovak Republic Luxembourg Japan Iceland prioritises education (Public expenditure in education as % of GDP) % Primary Secondary Tertiary 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Key policy levers for education reform Links with employment and welfare system Implementation alignment How to ensure student engagement and achievement? Students Quality in education Curriculum Curriculum and structure How to attract and develop quality teaching in schools? Teachers Schools How to ensure school leaders and schools provide effective learning environments?
Configuration of lower secondary education 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Australia x x x x x x x x x Austria x x x x x x x x x Belgium (Fl.) x x x x x x x x x x x x Belgium (Fr.) x x x x x x x x x x x x Canada x x x x x x x x x x Chile x x x x x x x x Czech Republic x x x x x x x x x Denmark x x x x x x x x x x England x x x x x x x x x x x Finland x x x x x x x x x France x x x x x x x x x x Germany x x x x x x x x x x Greece x x x x x x x x x x Hungary x x x x x x x x x x x x x Iceland x x x x x x x x x x Ireland 7 x x x x x x x x x x Italy x x x x x x x x x x Israel x x x x x x x x x x x Japan x x x x x x x x x Korea x x x x x x x x x x Luxembourg x x x x x x x x x x x x Mexico x x x x x x x x x x x Netherlands x x x x x x x x x x x x x New Zealand x x x x x x x x x x Norway x x x x x x x x x x Poland x x x x x x x x x x Portugal x x x x x x x x x Scotland x x x x x x x x x x x Slovak Republic x x x x x x x x x x Spain x x x x x x x x x x Sweden x x x x x x x x x Switzerland 9 x x x x x x x x x Turkey x x x x x x x x United States 10 x x x x x x x x x x x x x 10
Key policy levers for education reform Students Curriculum Quality in education Teachers Schools How to ensure school leaders and schools provide effective learning environments?
Italy Turkey Israel Germany Hungary Austria Belgium Luxembourg Netherlands Japan Chile Greece Czech Republic Slovenia United States Mexico Slovak Republic Ireland United Kingdom Switzerland Australia New Zealand Portugal Canada Sweden Spain Poland Estonia Iceland Denmark Norway Finland Variance Variation between schools is not large for Iceland 100 80 Performance differences between schools 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 100 Performance variation of students within schools
Austria Czech Republic Belgium Slovak Republic Finland Netherlands Switzerland Slovenia Luxembourg Italy Sweden Norway Germany Australia Denmark Poland OECD average France Spain Turkey New Zealand Portugal Israel Ireland Chile Iceland Estonia Greece United Kingdom Hungary Korea Japan Mexico Canada Percentage of students Secondary enrolment patterns 100 90 80 General Vocational 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Key policy levers for education reform How to ensure student engagement and achievement? Students Curriculum Quality in education How to attract and develop quality teaching in schools? Teachers Schools
Teachers trust their own effectiveness Making a significant educational difference Successful with students in their class Dark green bars represent teachers who strongly agree Making progress with students Light green bars represent teachers who agree 23% 69% 19% 76% 22% 61%
Students views of how teachers motivate them Index of teachers stimulation of students reading engagement based on students reports
Average days of professional development Teacher training practices across countries 40 TALIS Average Mexico 35 30 Italy Bulgaria Poland Korea 25 Spain 20 Brazil Portugal 15 10 5 Turkey Denmark Slovak Republic Iceland Hungary Norway TALIS Average Estonia Lithuania Malaysia Austria Australia Belgium (Fl.) Slovenia Ireland Malta 0 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Percentage of teachers in professional development Source: OECD. Table 3.1
Key policy levers for education reform Implementation alignment Students Curriculum Quality in education Teachers Schools
Finland More decentralisation in decision making England Hungary Netherlands Czech Republic Sweden Denmark Iceland New Zealand Norway Korea Austria Germany Portugal France Spain Greece 2003 1998 2007 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 More than 50% of decisions taken by schools/local level
Decision making in education across countries differs
Key policy levers for education reform Links with employment and welfare system Students Curriculum Quality in education Teachers Schools
Norway Switzerland Slovenia Iceland Sweden Netherlands Denmark Portugal Austria Germany Brazil Poland Luxembourg United Finland Czech Republic Australia Belgium New Zealand OECD average France Slovak Estonia Israel Greece Ireland Canada Mexico Spain United States Japan Italy Hungary Chile Korea Turkey Percentage of employed Percentage of 25-64 year-olds in employment by level of education (2009) 100 Tertiary education Below upper secondary Upper secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 -
Building on strengths to address challenges Strengths 1. Student performance above the OECD average (PISA 2009) Challenges 1. SCHOOLS: High dropout rates from upper secondary: structure 2. Iceland invests in its education system 3. Emphasizing equal access for all students at all levels 4. Lifelong learning from early childhood to adulthood 5. Recent policy reforms to raise the quality of education 6. Decentralized governance for better decisions 2. SCHOOLS: The quality of VET can also play a role 3. LABOR MARKET: Incentivizing students into the workforce and away from education 4. STUDENTS: Characteristics can increase risk of dropout: perform/rural/men 5. TEACHERS: faced with obstacles: preparation/incentives 6. GOVERNANCE: Weak knowledge /alignment/capacity
Addressing dropout 2. www.oecd.org/edu 24
Portugal Turkey Mexico Spain Italy Greece Iceland Chile France Belgium Australia Ireland New Zealand OECD Netherlands United Denmark Luxembourg Korea Hungary Norway Israel Austria Finland Slovenia Germany Sweden Switzerland Canada Poland United States Estonia Slovak Czech Dropout rates in Iceland are high 70 % 25-64 25-34 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Reducing school failure pays off Education failure imposes high costs to individuals and to society It limits capacity of economies to grow and innovate Damages social cohesion and mobility and is expensive: Higher public health expenditures Higher welfare, increased criminality.. and the current crisis has exacerbated this situation
Reducing school failure is a policy priority, but... There are many different policies and strategies, but no common knowledge base of what works Countries face challenges in adopting and implementing policies to reduce dropout Supporting disadvantaged schools and students is a lever out of the crisis. Need for policy knowledge and policy actions
Policies to reduce school failure Invest early and through upper secondary Support low performing disadvantaged schools Eliminate system level obstacles to equity
Education structures and practices that hinder equity Eliminate grade repetition Automatic promotion with support/limit repetition to the subjects failed Align school incentives to avoid repetition Postpone tracking to upper secondary Comprehensive school to upper secondary Suppress low-level tracks Limit selection to specific subjects or flexible settings Manage school choice to avoid inequities Limited choice by having equity criteria Schemes/incentives to support low performing/ disadvantaged students Reduce costs of making well-informed choices Make funding responsive to need Consider that costs of students differ Ensure resources reach schools: balancing autonomy and accountability. Design equivalent upper secondary pathways Improve quality of VET; transitions across different pathways; remove dead ends Better information and guidance to students Support strategies for those at risk of dropping out
Policies to achieve more equitable education systems Invest early and through upper secondary Support low performing disadvantaged schools/students Eliminate system level obstacles to equity
Supporting low performing schools School leadership Initial school leadership training; attractive working conditions to attract and retain competent leaders Restructure schools when needed School climate School plans to prioritise school climate and positive relationships, discipline alone not effective. Monitoring and data for intervention. Quality teaching Provide specialised initial teacher education -field experience. Ensure incentives and working conditions, time for planning, working together, mentoring. Classroom strategies Parental and community engagement Support culture of high expectations Provide teacher support on how to tailor instruction, assessment and curricular practices to needs of disadvantaged schools and students. Diverse com. strategies, efforts to reach out Provide guidelines to parents on their role Foster closer links with communities and mentors.
Policy areas for Iceland 3. www.oecd.org/edu 32
Six policy areas to address upper secondary dropout Ensuring VET is relevant to labour market needs Exploring the effect of incentives in the labour market Supporting teacher quality Evaluating the structure of upper secondary education Transitions: improving support to assess students needs and provide guidance Governance: support and capacity building for schools and their leaders
Implementation challenges in Iceland Reforms already approved, some pending implementation Funding situation provides challenges and opportunities Need for alignment and consensus to progress Need to prioritise and focus on key areas OECD can support this process through the Improving Schools Review
Thank you! Beatriz.Pont@oecd.org www.oecd.org/edu/improvingschools