1 gender gap from? Programme for What can we learn about the gender gap from Francesca Borgonovi Maciej Jakubowski OECD Programme for Paris, 3 October 2011
2 gender gap from? This document, not published by IIEP, is distributed with the authorization of the author and has been presented on the occasion of the IIEP Policy Forum on Gender Equality in Education held on the 3-4 October, 2011 in Paris, France. The views and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of UNESCO or IIEP. The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this document do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO or IIEP concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or its authorities, or concerning its frontiers or boundaries.
3 gender gap from? 70 60 50 40 Gender Gap in Reading Girls perform better in all countries/economies 30 20 10 0 Colombia Chile Peru Azerbaijan Netherlands United States Mexico United Kingdom Belgium Brazil Denmark Spain Tunisia Singapore Liechtenstein Hong Kong-China Panama Macao-China Canada Korea Indonesia Argentina Australia Chinese Taipei Thailand Hungary Portugal Switzerland Japan Ireland Luxembourg Serbia Germany Shanghai-China France Austria Uruguay Israel Romania Kazakhstan Turkey Iceland Estonia Russian Federation Sweden New Zealand Italy Greece Norway Latvia Czech Republic Poland Qatar Dubai (UAE) Croatia Slovak Republic Montenegro Kyrgyzstan Slovenia Finland Jordan Trinidad and Tobago Lithuania Bulgaria Albania
4 gender gap from? 70 50 30 The Gender Gap in Mathematics Girls perform better in these countries/economies 10-10 -30 Colombia Liechtenstein Belgium Chile United Kingdom United States Switzerland Luxembourg Austria Spain Peru Netherlands France Denmark Germany Brazil Italy Hong Kong-China Greece Mexico Uruguay Tunisia Montenegro Hungary Canada Portugal Serbia Macao-China Turkey Croatia Argentina Australia Japan Estonia Israel Azerbaijan New Zealand Ireland Singapore Panama Norway Czech Republic Chinese Taipei Thailand Poland Iceland Romania Korea Slovak Republic Finland Dubai (UAE) Russian Federation Latvia Slovenia Jordan Kazakhstan Shanghai-China Indonesia Sweden Bulgaria Qatar Kyrgyzstan Lithuania Trinidad and Tobago Albania Girls perform worse in these countries/economies -50
5 gender gap from? 70 50 30 Gender Gap in Science Girls perform better in these countries/economies 10-10 -30 Jordan Albania Dubai (UAE) Qatar Kyrgyzstan Bulgaria Trinidad and Tobago Lithuania Finland Slovenia Thailand Montenegro Turkey Japan Romania Greece Indonesia Croatia Kazakhstan Argentina Azerbaijan Latvia New Zealand Poland Czech Republic Sweden Norway Portugal Russian Federation Israel Ireland Macao-China Korea Panama Italy Serbia Uruguay Singapore Chinese Taipei Australia Estonia Slovak Republic Shanghai-China Hungary Tunisia Iceland Hong Kong-China Brazil France Netherlands Peru Canada Germany Belgium Mexico Luxembourg Spain Austria Switzerland Chile United Kingdom Denmark United States Liechtenstein Colombia -50 Girls perform worse in these countries/economies
6 gender gap from? Reading proficiency - boys and girls Boys Girls 0.5 Level 6 1.2 4.8 Level 5 8.8 16.8 Level 4 24.7 27.0 Level 3 30.9 26.0 16.6 6.6 Level 2 Level 1a Level 1b 2.6 9.5 21.9 1.8 Below Level 1b 0.5 35 % 30 25 20 15 10 5 0-5 5 15 25 35 %
7 gender gap from? 30 20 10 0-10 Gender gap across assessment areas and at different proficiency levels 5 12 18-8 0 9 p10-20 -30-40 -50-49 -39-27 mean p90-60 reading mathematics science
8 gender gap from? Trends in gender gap
9 gender gap from? 15 10 5 0-5 Change in the share of boys and girls who are low performers in reading between 2000 and 2009 % Change in the percentage of boys below proficiency Level 2 Change in the percentage of girls below proficiency Level 2 Share of students below proficiency Level 2 increased -10-15 -20-25 Share of students below proficiency Level 2 decreased Chile Indonesia Peru Albania Latvia Portugal Poland Israel Liechtenstein Brazil Hungary Germany Mexico Switzerland Greece Denmark Norway Belgium ECD average-26 Romania Hong Kong-China United States ssian Federation Korea New Zealand Bulgaria Canada Finland Australia Italy Iceland Spain Japan France Sweden Czech Republic Thailand Ireland Argentina
10 gender gap from? Score point difference 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Trends in reading gender gap Gender difference in performance in 2000 Gender difference in performance in 2009 Girls perform better in all countries/economies Chile o Peru o United States o Mexico o Belgium o Brazil + Denmark o Spain o Liechtenstein o Hong Kong-China + Canada o Korea + Indonesia + Argentina o Australia o Thailand o Hungary o Portugal + Switzerland o Japan o Ireland o Germany o France + Israel + Romania + Iceland o Russian Federation Sweden + New Zealand o Italy o Greece o Norway o Latvia o Czech Republic o Poland o Finland o Bulgaria o Albania o
11 gender gap from? Reading performance improvement among boys and girls Chile Poland Korea Girls Boys 0 10 20 30 40 50 Score point change between 2000 and 2009
12 gender gap from? Gendered Career Expectations
13 gender gap from? 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 Ambitious girls and boys All students Boys Girls 20 10 0 Jordan Azerbaijan Turkey Mexico Tunisia Colombia Israel Uruguay Kyrgyzstan Chile Bulgaria Argentina Thailand Russian Federation Macao-China Chinese Taipei United States Indonesia Lithuania Brazil Spain Korea Iceland Portugal Greece Luxembourg Ireland Italy Canada Slovak Republic Belgium Slovenia Latvia Hong Kong-China New Zealand Poland Australia OECD average Romania Montenegro Estonia United Kingdom Serbia Norway Hungary Netherlands Czech Republic France* Japan* Denmark Finland Croatia Sweden Austria Germany* Switzerland Percentage of students who plan to work in ISCO major occupational group 1 & 2, by gender
14 gender gap from? Most popular careers according to ISCO code Boys Number of OECD countries Number of partner countries ISCO code Girls Number of OECD countries 3475 athletes, sports persons 27 13 2221 medical doctors 32 21 2221 medical doctors 26 15 5141 hairdressers, barbers, beauticians etc workers 28 10 7231 motor vehicle mechanics & fitters 25 6 2421 lawyers 25 17 2140 architects, engineers 14 11 2445 psychologists 25 10 5162 police officers 14 9 2451 authors journalists & other writers 20 8 2141 architects town & traffic planners 13 2 3471 decorators & commercial designers 16 8 5122 cooks 12 7 2230 nursing & midwifery profess 13 6 7137 building etc electricians 10 1 2300 teaching professionals 12 10 7124 carpenters & joiners 10 0 2331 primary education teaching professionals 12 4 2132 computer programmers 10 10 2223 veterinarians 12 5 2421 lawyers 10 10 2141 architects town & traffic planners 10 2 2130 computing professionals 8 1 3231 nursing associate professionals 9 2 2131 computer systems designers & analysts 7 5 2320 secondary education teaching professionals 7 3 2411 accountants 6 5 2332 pre-primary educ. teaching professionals 9 1 2149 architects engineers 6 11 3226 physiotherapists etc associate professionals 7 0 3121 computer assistants 6 1 5220 shop salespersons & demonstrators 6 2 1310 small enterprise general managers 6 11 2411 accountants 5 9 2300 teaching professionals 6 5 3320 pre-primary education teaching associate professionals 5 0 7136 plumbers & pipe fitters 5 1 4100 office clerks 4 3 2451 authors journalists & other writers 4 0 5131 child-care workers 4 0 3471 decorators & commercial designers 4 1 2211 biologists, botanists zoologists etc professionals 3 3 Number of partner countries 2320 secondary education teaching professionals 4 2 2321 sec. teachers, academic track incl. middle school 4 6 Source: OECD 2006 Database.
15 gender gap from? Percentage of all students who plan a career engineering or computing Jordan 24.1 Poland 19.6 Thailand 17.5 Mexico 16.7 Colombia 16.6 Chile 16.4 Slovenia 15.2 Latvia 14.9 Portugal 14.9 Spain 14.4 Turkey 14.1 Estonia 13.7 Norway 13.4 Chinese Taipei 13.1 Slovak Republic 13.1 Italy 13.1 Czech Republic 12.9 Greece 12.5 Russian Federation 12.4 Belgium 12.2 Lithuania 11.9 Argentina 11.7 Hungary 11.6 Bulgaria* 11.5 OECD average 11.3 Uruguay 11.0 Romania 11.0 Brazil 11.0 Israel 10.8 Canada 10.7 Iceland 10.6 Serbia 10.6 Ireland 10.5 Luxembourg 10.4 France 10.3 Croatia 10.2 Tunisia 10.2 Sweden 9.8 Australia 9.5 United States 9.4 Indonesia* 9.3 Switzerland 9.1 Austria 9.1 Japan 9.0 Germany 8.9 Denmark 8.2 Hong Kong-China 8 New Zealand 7.6 Korea 7.5 United Kingdom 7.2 Finland 6.0 Macao-China 5.7 Azerbaijan 5.2 Netherlands 5.1 Kyrgyzstan 5.0 Montenegro* 4.5 Girls Boys Proportion of boys and girls planning a career in engineering or computing 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
16 gender gap from? Percentage of all students who plan a career in health services Czech Republic 5.3 Latvia 5.4 Korea 6.0 Slovak Republic 6.3 Estonia 6.4 Hungary 6.7 Chinese Taipei* 6.9 Germany 7.5 Lithuania 7.6 Austria 7.7 Sweden 8.2 Switzerland 8.2 Luxembourg 8.3 Russian Federation 8.5 Belgium 8.6 Greece 9.0 Finland 9.1 Netherlands 9.2 Macao-China 9.4 Montenegro 9.7 Croatia 9.7 Norway 10.1 Hong Kong-China* 10.3 Romania 10.4 United Kingdom 10.5 Denmark 10.5 Poland 10.7 Turkey 11.1 Australia 11.3 OECD average 11.5 Japan 11.5 Serbia 11.7 Italy 11.9 Spain 13.1 Slovenia 13.1 Argentina 13.7 Ireland 13.9 New Zealand 14.3 Iceland 14.6 Mexico 15.2 Thailand 15.6 Azerbaijan 15.6 France 15.8 Indonesia 16.3 Uruguay 16.9 Portugal 17.4 Bulgaria* 18.0 Jordan* 18.7 Canada 18.9 Israel 19.1 Tunisia 20.1 United States 20.3 Chile 20.5 Brazil 22.3 Colombia 23.2 Kyrgyzstan 24.3 Girls Boys Proportion of boys and girls planning a career in health services (excluding nursing) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
17 gender gap from? The Gender Gap in Motivation Females graduation rates in mathematics/computing 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 Mexico Turkey Portugal Italy Finland Greece Korea Sweden Poland Hungary Ireland Canada Spain Brazil Australia United New Denmark States Zealand Czech France Germany Republic Norway Belgium Slovak Republic Netherlands Austria Switzerland Luxembourg 10-0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Motivation gap (boys - girls)
18 gender gap from? Summary Gender gaps in schools are more evident when looking at top performers in mathematics and low performers in reading. Policy decisions should aim at encouraging talented girls to study mathematics and science at the most advanced levels. Lack of reading skills among low performing boys is worrying. Policies aiming at helping boys to acquire reading skills are especially needed among those with basic reading problems. Career preferences and motivation seems to be more important than achievement for future choices of students. Even top-skilled girls at age 15 rarely opt for engineering or computing. Achievement-focused policies will not change the relative disadvantage of women in labour markets. School level policies aimed at attracting girls to mathematics and science as future career options should be part of more general policies that try to change traditional views on the role of women as professionals.
19 gender gap from? The OECD Gender Initiative Recognising the importance of gender equality, the OECD has embarked on a Horizontal Project in Gender Equality in three areas key to economic opportunity: Education, Employment and Entrepreneurship
20 gender gap from? The OECD Gender Initiative develop more detailed knowledge on KEY barriers in the three Es Establish standard indicators to measure progress in closing gender gaps Collect better and more comparable data on gender gaps in entrepreneurship expected outcome OECD database Promote an exchange of best practices and policy transferability between OECD countries and emerging economies
21 gender gap from? Thank you! Find out more about at OECD www.pisa.oecd.org Email: Francesca.Borgonovi@OECD.org Maciej.Jakubowski@oecd.org