OECD preliminary views on the Project for Autonomy and Flexibility 9 February 2018

OECD preliminary views on the Project for Autonomy and Flexibility 9 February 2018 Andreas Schleicher, Director OECD Directorate for Education and Skills

Today s focus --- Structure of analysis: Bigger picture Overall strategy Curriculum design Curriculum implementation

Bigger picture: Today s Portugal

The economy is recovering billion EUR 185 180 175 170 165 160 155 150 145 Real GDP 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Source: Calculations based on OECD Economic Outlook: Statistics and Projections (database). 4

Competitiveness has improved 120 110 Export performance Index 2000 = 100 Portugal Germany Italy Spain 100 90 80 70 60 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 Export Performance measures the expansion of a country s exports relative to the expansion of import demand from its trading partners. Improvements in export performance reflect rising market shares in the imports of trading partners. 5

Unemployment is falling Unemployment rate, % 20 15 10 5 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Source: OECD (2016), OECD Economic Outlook: Statistics and Projections (database) and Banco de Portugal (2016), General Statistics, BPstat (database). 6

However some vulnerabilities remain Public debt is high 150 General government debt, Maastricht definition, per cent of GDP 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 Under current plans Higher interest rate Lower inflation 70 60 50 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Source: Calculations based on OECD (2016), OECD Economic Outlook: Statistics and Projections (database). 7

MEX TUR PRT ESP ITA CHL GRC LUX BEL 1. Working age population: 25-64 years-olds. Source: OECD (2016), Education at a Glance 2016: OECD Indicators. ISL NZL NLD OECD FRA AUS GBR IRL DNK SWE NOR HUN AUT ISR KOR SVN DEU FIN LVA CHE USA CAN POL EST SVK CZE 8 Improving skills is key 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Percentage of working age population having attained at least upper secondary education, 2015 1 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

ESP PRT BEL NLD DEU ITA USA OE AUT CAN AUS ISR EST POL NZL SWE DNK CZE SVK FIN GBR SVN ISL JPN KOR NOR Grade repetition is too commonly used 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 % of 15-year-old students who have repeated at least one year 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Source: OECD (2012), Equity and Quality in Education: Supporting Disadvantaged Students and Schools. 9

What is Tomorrow s Portugal?

Mexico Japan Poland Turkey Korea Chile Slovak Republic Hungary Finland Czech Republic Portugal Denmark Italy Estonia Iceland EU/EFTA Netherlands France OECD average Spain Germany United States United Kingdom Norway Belgium Ireland Slovenia Sweden Austria Canada Israel New Zealand Australia Switzerland Luxembourg The percentage of foreign-born students are increasing: It is becoming more ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 2014 2000 Figure I.2.18

Global competence (PISA)

Global competence (PISA) Knowledge of global issues and intercultural issues Content domains: Culture and intercultural relations (as students engage in learning about other cultures they recognise multiple, complex identities and avoid categorising people through single markers) Socio-economic development and interdependence Environmental sustainability Global institutions, conflicts and human rights

Global competence (PISA) Global competence builds on specific cognitive and socio-emotional skills, including Reasoning with information Communication in intercultural contexts Perspective-taking (the cognitive and social skills to understand how other people think and feel) Conflict resolution Adaptability

Global competence (PISA) The mind-set that students adopt towards a person, a group, an institution, an issue, a behaviour or a symbol Openness towards people from other cultural backgrounds Respect for cultural differences Global-mindedness

Global competence (PISA) Values go beyond attitudes as they transcend specific objects or situations People use them consciously and unconsciously as reference for judgements Human dignity Cultural diversity

Digitalisation and children Democratizing Particularizing Empowering Concentrating Homogenizing Disempowering 17

Technologies and youths

Chinese Taipei -2 Sweden -9 France -5 Portugal Greece Singapore -2 Thailand Macao (China) -7 Brazil -2 Spain United Kingdom Bulgaria Hong Kong (China) Korea -7 Belgium -4 Denmark -4 Croatia -5 Israel -10 New Zealand -4 Netherlands -3 Uruguay Hungary 4 Australia OECD average -3 Dominican Republic Ireland -7 Poland -3 Costa Rica 3 Lithuania Japan -5 Mexico Russia -8 Czech Republic Italy Peru Colombia 4 Finland -6 Chile Latvia Slovak Republic B-S-J-G (China) 11 Switzerland Austria -3 Luxembourg Iceland Germany Estonia Slovenia 15-year-olds feeling bad if not connected to the Internet (PISA) Figure III.13.6 90 % Boys Girls 80 70 60 50 40 30

Chile 39 Sweden 56 Uruguay 33 Costa Rica 31 Spain 44 Italy 40 Australia 52 Estonia 50 New Zealand 51 Hungary 43 Russia 42 Netherlands 48 Denmark 55 Slovak Republic 40 Czech Republic 43 Austria 42 Latvia 46 Singapore 45 Belgium 44 Poland 46 Iceland 51 OECD average-27 43 Ireland 48 Croatia 40 Portugal 42 Finland 48 Israel 34 Macao (China) 45 Switzerland 40 Greece 41 Hong Kong (China) 39 Mexico 30 Slovenia 37 Japan 31 Korea 20 Increase in time spent on line outside school on a typical school day Figure III.13.3 Minutes per day 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 2015 2012 Percentage of High Internet Users (spending 2 to 6 hours on line per day), during weekdays

What kind of competencies do today s students need to create a new future of Portugal?

OECD Learning Framework 2030

Underlying concepts of the Portuguese Student Profile is in line with the OECD Learning Framework 2030.

Other initiatives to achieve a better future National Program for Promoting School Success National Education Strategy for Citizenship Essential Core curriculum Investment in Pre-school and Transition to Preschool In-service training New law for inclusion Changes in assessments (focusing on formative assessment and diversity of instruments) InCode 2030 National Reading Plan and network of school libraries

OECD visit the pilot schools and non-pilot school 15-19 January 2018

What we saw - Overall Strategy -

STRENGTHS: Strategic thinking: there is a clear Theory of Action for a change. Student profile with broadened outcomes as well as a strong sense of ownership Strategic approach to communications, e.g. Student Profile Day on 15 January 2018 The openness for reflections of the Ministry in respect of the pilot.

The pilot project is in line with the national skills strategy: Portugal s National Skills Strategy Diagnostic Phase 2014-2015 2

35 The pilot project is in line with the inclusion strategy because inequities in the education system persist % of PISA score variance explained by students socio-economic background Portugal OECD average OECD minimum/maximum 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2006 2015 2009 2012 Science Reading Mathematics Source: PISA 2015 Results: Excellence and Equity in Education (Vol. I); PISA 2012 Results: What Students Know and Can Do (Vol. I); PISA 2012 Results: Excellence Through Equity (Vol. II); PISA 2009 Results: Overcoming Social Background (Vol. II) and PISA 2006, Vol. 2: Data.

Dominican Republic 40 Algeria 52 Kosovo 10 Qatar 3 FYROM 13 Tunisia 39 Montenegro 11 Jordan 21 United Arab Emirates 3 Georgia 19 Lebanon 27 Indonesia 74 Mexico 53 Peru 50 Costa Rica 38 Brazil 43 Turkey 59 Moldova 28 Thailand 55 Colombia 43 Iceland 1 Trinidad and Tobago 14 Romania 20 Israel 6 Bulgaria 13 Greece 13 Russia 5 Uruguay 39 Chile 27 Latvia 25 Lithuania 12 Slovak Republic 8 Italy 15 Norway 1 Spain 31 Hungary 16 Croatia 10 Denmark 3 OECD average 12 Sweden 3 Malta 13 United States 11 Macao (China) 22 Ireland 5 Austria 5 Portugal 28 Luxembourg 14 Hong Kong (China) 26 Czech Republic 9 Poland 16 Australia 4 United Kingdom 5 Canada 2 France 9 Korea 6 New Zealand 5 Switzerland 8 Netherlands 4 Slovenia 5 Belgium 7 Finland 2 Estonia 5 Viet Nam 76 Germany 7 Japan 8 Chinese Taipei 12 B-S-J-G (China) 52 Singapore 11 Score points Poverty is not destiny - Science performance by international deciles of the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS) 630 Figure I.6.7 580 Bottom decile Second decile Middle decile Ninth decile Top decile 530 OECD median student 480 430 380 330 280 % of students in the bottom international deciles of ESCS

CHALLENGES Conflict with associated assessments/ articulation between different types of assessment (internal/external) Misunderstanding that greater flexibility in the curriculum and essential learning lead to lowering learning standards Conflict with dominant model of high centralization: inherent conflicts between the learning model implicit in the pilot project and the existing highly prescribed, centralized system Culture clash: students experience of participative, relevant, competency-based approaches in the flexible curriculum, in comparison with deeply dissatisfied with the traditional offer in schools Further engagement of non-pilot schools into national initiatives e.g. student profile.

RECOMMENDATIONS Intensify collecting evidence of impact of the pilot evidence of improved student engagement and outcomes; evidence of improved teacher well-being; evidence of good practice at all levels. Prioritise investment in capacity building to develop teacher and leadership skills. Launch a debate on entrance to university to align it with Student Profile Fulfil the promise to extend the project to all schools in 2018/19, making clear the voluntary nature. Prepared for expected/ unexpected consequences Ensure continuity of this change with a long time frame to ensure real effects.

What we saw - Curriculum Design -

Curriculum Overload Students often lack sufficient time to master key disciplinary concepts or, in the interests of a balanced life, to nurture friendships, to sleep and to exercise. It is time to shift the focus of our students from "more hours for learning" to "quality learning time".

Curriculum overload What is also happening within curriculum space with traditional subjects

Curriculum overload - The multi-faceted world of knowledge

Curriculum overload - The human world of knowledge

Curriculum overload - The small world of the curriculum

Curriculum overload - The small world of the curriculum

Curriculum overload - The small world of the curriculum

Curriculum overload - The small world of the curriculum

Curriculum overload - The small world of the curriculum

Curriculum overload - The small world of the curriculum Degrading student learning to machine learning where technology will make humans obsolete

The productivity puzzle Making learning time productive so that students can build their academic, social and emotional skills in a balanced way

OECD average PISA science score Learning time and science performance Figure II.6.23 600 OECD average 550 500 450 400 Finland Japan Estonia Macao (China) New Zealand Netherlands Germany Switzerland Sweden Uruguay Iceland Israel Bulgaria Colombia Hong Kong (China) Singapore Chinese Taipei Korea Poland United States Russia Italy Greece Brazil Mexico Costa Rica Chile Turkey Montenegro Peru Qatar Thailand B-S-J-G (China) OECD average Tunisia R² = 0,21 United Arab Emirates 350 Dominican Republic 300 35 40 45 50 55 60 Total learning time in and outside of school

Finland Germany Switzerland Japan Estonia Sweden Netherlands New Zealand Australia Czech Republic Macao (China) United Kingdom Canada Belgium France Norway Slovenia Iceland Luxembourg Ireland Latvia Hong Kong (China) OECD average Chinese Taipei Austria Portugal Uruguay Lithuania Singapore Denmark Hungary Poland Slovak Republic Spain Croatia United States Israel Bulgaria Korea Russia Italy Greece B-S-J-G (China) Colombia Chile Mexico Brazil Costa Rica Turkey Montenegro Peru Qatar Thailand United Arab Emirates Tunisia Dominican Republic Score points in science per hour of total learning time Learning time and science performance Figure II.6.23 Hours Intended learning time at school (hours) Study time after school (hours) Score points in science per hour of total learning time 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6

STRENGTHS The process involved hearing headmaster, teacher societies, Unions, the National Council for Education, researchers, social partners, parent representatives, students; and thus, sstakeholders understood the broader vision for the purposes of education as outlined by the pilot project and the student profile. The pilot project (not compulsory) gives legal space for all schools to spontaneously and progressively adhere to the possibilities for curriculum design, especially, exemplar schools justification for experimental pedagogies, e.g. project-based learning and formative assessment. The pilot enabled teachers to design and experience meaningful in-school professional development. The pilot project enabled teachers to experience and value diversity in curriculum for inclusion and equity.

STRENGTHS The pilot project enabled students to experience and value the following elements of curriculum design to strengthen the design principle of authenticity. Opportunity to learn how to work and learn together with peers (sometimes across different grades) Opportunity to build positive relationships with teachers Opportunity to make choices that reflects their interests Opportunity to present their work that went beyond the teacher, into the community, for purposes other than grades, such as presenting at science fairs and using relevant knowledge and skills to solve school and community issues Relevance to future (university work, professional work, becoming a citizen) Opportunity to connect schools with professionals in the community Diversity of learning methods (e.g. active learning)

OECD Design Principles (work in progress) Concept, content and topic design: Student agency Rigor Focus Coherence Alignment Transferability Choice Process design: Teacher agency Authenticity Inter-relation Flexibility Engagement

CHALLENGES Dilemma between two worlds when designing curriculum: teaching for the national exam vs. active learning, formative assessment, etc. Technical complexities e.g. structure school time, arranging inter-disciplinary learning when designing curriculum flexibility Scaling and sustainability: e.g. Prioritizing student learning and engagement A culture of learning, trust, creativity, thoughtful risk taking, Regular practice of faculty collaboration; students collaboration, reflection and action to improve practice; engaging and building partnerships with community and other stakeholders Managing differences between school practices.

Instruction time per subject in general lower secondary education (2017) Compulsory flexible curriculum Reading, writing and literature Mathematics Natural sciences Second and other languages Other compulsory curriculum 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Source: OECD (2017), Table D1.3b. See Source section for more information and Annex 3 for notes (www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance-19991487.htm).

Resources Curriculum Disciplinary policies Assessment policies Admissions policies Resources Curriculum Disciplinary policies Assessment policies Admissions policies Resources Curriculum Disciplinary policies Assessment policies Admissions policies Resources Curriculum Disciplinary policies Assessment policies Admissions policies Resources Curriculum Disciplinary policies Assessment policies Admissions policies Higher science 0,6 Correlations between the responsibilities for school governance¹ and science performance School principal Teachers School governing board Local or regional education authority National education authority 0,4 0,2 0,0-0,2-0,4-0,6 Lower -0,8 science performanc e Source: OECD, PISA 2015 Database. PISA Figure II.4.8

RECOMMENDATIONS Continue to gather feedback from teachers on the pilot experiences, research on different models of curriculum design and share them with all schools to ensure equity Identify lighthouse schools so other schools can visit and see the successful pilot projects, student profile, and policy in action but keep resistance to standardiese. Continue to ensure that the pilot project spreads within schools, to ensure equity and equal access to all students Build clarity about competence to be attained by students with ICT to support better flexible curriculum design

What we saw - Curriculum Implementation -

Netherlands 7.8 Mexico 8.3 Dominican Republic 8.5 Finland 7.9 Costa Rica 8.2 Croatia 7.9 Switzerland 7.7 Lithuania 7.9 Iceland 7.8 France 7.6 Colombia 7.9 lgium (excl. Flemish) 7.5 Uruguay 7.7 Austria 7.5 Russia 7.8 Estonia 7.5 Spain 7.4 Montenegro 7.8 Thailand 7.7 Latvia 7.4 Germany 7.4 Brazil 7.6 Portugal 7.4 Ireland 7.3 Luxembourg 7.4 Slovak Republic 7.5 OECD average 7.3 Peru 7.5 United States 7.4 Chile 7.4 Hungary 7.2 Bulgaria 7.4 Qatar 7.4 Slovenia 7.2 Poland 7.2 United Arab Emirates 7.3 Czech Republic 7.1 United Kingdom 7.0 Italy 6.9 Greece 6.9 Japan 6.8 Tunisia 6.9 B-S-J-G (China) 6.8 Macao (China) 6.6 Chinese Taipei 6.6 Hong Kong (China) 6.5 Korea 6.4 Turkey 6.1 Life satisfaction among 15-year-old students % 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Very satisfied Satisfied Moderately satisfied Not satisfied Factors that Factors predict that high predict life satisfaction: poor life satisfaction: Students who talk or meet Anxiety with with friends school after work school More physical High activity internet use Good teacher support Good parental support

Prevalence of schoolwork-related anxiety Figure III.4.1(1) OECD average Portugal I often worry that it will be difficult for me taking a test I worry that I will get poor <grades> at school Even if I am well prepared for a test I feel very anxious I get very tense when I study I get nervous when I don't know how to solve a task at school 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Percentage of students

Dominican Republic * Costa Rica Brazil Colombia Uruguay * Singapore United Kingdom New Zealand Qatar * Italy Peru Australia Chinese Taipei Hong Kong (China) Montenegro United States Portugal United Arab Emirates Japan Macao (China) Thailand Spain Sweden Denmark Korea * Canada Slovenia Norway B-S-J-G (China) Ireland Lithuania Greece Turkey Bulgaria OECD average Mexico Hungary Estonia Chile Tunisia Finland Netherlands * Croatia Russia Slovak Republic France Iceland Austria Israel Luxembourg Latvia Poland Belgium Czech Republic Germany Switzerland Greater anxiety Schoolwork-related anxiety among students in the top and bottom quarters of science performance Figure III.4.2 90 80 70 % Top quarter of science performance Bottom quarter of science performance Percentage of students who reported that they "agree" or "strongly agree" with the statement "Even if I am well prepared for a test, I feel very anxious" 60 50 40 30 20 * = no statistically significant difference

Odds ratios (logarithmic scale) More teacher support and less anxiety Figure III.4.5 More likely Even if I am well prepared for a test I feel very anxious I get very tense when I study 60% more likely 16% more likely 44% more likely 29% more likely As likely 5% less likely 4% less likely 9% less likely 17% less likely ess likely The teacher adapts the lesson to my class s needs and knowledge The teacher provides individual help when a student has difficulties understanding a topic or task Teachers graded me harder than they graded other students Teachers gave me the impression that they think I am less smart than I really am

Kazakhstan Romania FYROM Jordan Lebanon Malaysia Switzerland United Arab Emirates Croatia Sweden Georgia Dominican Republic Moldova Brazil B-S-J-G (China) Turkey Albania Lithuania Japan Spain Austria Bulgaria Tunisia Peru Luxembourg Italy Thailand Germany Russia Kosovo Finland France Ireland Australia CABA (Argentina) Netherlands Estonia Mexico Viet Nam Chile United Kingdom Qatar Trinidad and Tobago Colombia OECD average Poland Greece Uruguay Montenegro Slovak Republic Czech Republic Norway Slovenia Indonesia Chinese Taipei Denmark Korea Belgium Algeria Iceland Portugal Hungary Hong Kong (China) Macao (China) Canada New Zealand Singapore Latvia Costa Rica United States Malta Sense of belonging relates to disciplinary climate Figure III.7.6 0,60 0,50 Mean index difference After accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile Before accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile 0,40 0,30 Students report higher sense of belonging in schools with a more positive disciplinary climate 0,20 0,10 0,00-0,10

Russia Montenegro Croatia United Arab Emirates Tunisia Ireland Greece Estonia Norway France Slovak Republic Japan Uruguay Poland Singapore Hungary Germany Thailand Brazil Mexico Switzerland United Kingdom Belgium Australia United States Latvia New Zealand Slovenia OECD average Netherlands Czech Republic Macao (China) Chinese Taipei B-S-J-G (China) Qatar Bulgaria Hong Kong (China) Spain Luxembourg Portugal Austria Iceland Peru Chile Costa Rica Denmark Korea Sweden Finland Dominican Republic Colombia Turkey Lithuania Greater alineation Students' who perceive teachers' unfairness are feeling more likely as outsiders Figure III.7.9 Odds ratio After accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile Before accounting for students' and schools' socio-economic profile 2 1 Students who perceive unfair behaviour report that: "Teachers disciplined me more harshly than other students", "Teachers ridiculed me in front of others" or "Teachers said something insulting to me in front of others a few times a month or once a week or more

Iceland -10 Korea -8 Macao (China) -7 Austria Singapore Finland Spain Norway Germany Sweden Japan Australia New Zealand Portugal Czech Republic France OECD average Canada United States United Kingdom Italy Belgium Slovenia Lithuania Brazil 6 Bulgaria 6 United Arab Emirates 7 B-S-J-G (China) Turkey 8 Russia 9 Mexico 11 Peru 12 Colombia 14 Difference in the percentage of students who perform higher than expected in collaborative Relative performance in collaborative problem solving, by socio-economic status % Disadvantaged students Advantaged students 60 55 50 45 40 Source: PISA 2015 Results (Volume V): Collaborative Problem Solving. Figure V 4.9 6

STRENGTHS school and teacher level The voluntary nature of the flexibility ensure incremental change for school leaders and teachers. The pilot helped to identify enthusiastic school leaders and teachers, as a source holder of good practices e.g. teachers working together The pilot empowered exemplar teachers by legitimising and endorsing good practices The pilot gathered emerging and existing evidence of teacher innovation, leadership, and creativity as well as teacher well-being.

CHALLENGES School and teacher level The cultural shift for school leaders and teachers: from preparing for the national exam to more collaborative form of working, different role of teachers, valuing student agency and co-agency Networking and professional exchange: It is arranged rather ad hoc or informally. The degree and relevance is up to school leaders. Teaching workforce structure and status: older than the OECD average, status of teaching profession. Different degree of curriculum innovation within and across schools.

Poland Serbia Croatia Spain Portugal Slovak Republic England (UK) Israel Australia Czech Republic France Finland Norway Flanders (Belgium) Italy Average Bulgaria Latvia Romania Brazil Denmark Estonia Mexico Sweden Netherlands Chile Singapore Iceland Alberta (Canada) Abu Dhabi (UAE) Korea Japan Malaysia United States Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status 67 Elements not included in principals' formal education Fig II.3.3 Percentage of lower secondary principals whose formal education did not include: 70 60 Instructional leadership training or course Teacher training/education programme or course School administration or principal training programme or course 50 40 30 20 10 0

Collaboration between teachers and principals in lower secondary education (TALIS 2013) Percentage of principals who report having engaged "often" or "very often" in the following leadership activities during the 12 months prior to the survey % 100 90 Observe instruction in the classroom Take action to ensure that teachers take responsibility for improving their teaching skills Take action to support co-operation among teachers to develop new teaching practices 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Abu Dhabi (United Arab Mexico Chile Norway Denmark Australia Alberta (Canada) United States Brazil England (United Kingdom) Sweden Malaysia Average Netherlands Slovak Republic Portugal Romania Bulgaria Iceland Spain Poland Italy Latvia Singapore Czech Republic France Estonia Flanders (Belgium) Serbia Israel Korea Finland Croatia Japan Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status 69 Teaching practices by country Percentage of lower secondary teachers who report using the following teaching practices "frequently" or "in all or nearly all lessons" Fig II.3.3 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Cumulative percentage of the three teaching practices is above 150% Students work in small groups to come up with a joint solution to a problem or task Students work on projects that require at least one week to complete Students use ICT for projects or class work

Spain Iceland France Brazil Flanders Portugal Finland Croatia Italy Israel Sweden Mexico Chile Alberta United States Norway Denmark Average Australia Malaysia Czech Bulgaria Estonia Netherlands Serbia Slovak Abu Dhabi Singapore England (UK) Poland Romania Latvia Japan Korea Percentage of teachers Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status 70 Teacher co-operation: Professional collaboration Fig II.3.3 Percentage of lower secondary teachers who report never doing the following activities 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Never observe other teachers' classes and provide feedback Never teach jointly as a team in the same class Never engage in joint activities across different classes and age groups (e.g. projects) Never take part in collaborative professional learning 0

Bulgaria Poland United States Romania Alberta Croatia Czech Republic Abu Dhabi Flanders Serbia Slovak Republic Japan Israel Average Singapore Latvia Brazil Mexico Malaysia Sweden Estonia England (UK) Norway Finland Portugal Denmark Korea Chile Italy Netherlands France Spain Iceland Australia Percentage of teachers 71 Teachers feedback : Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status direct classroom observations Fig II.3.3 100 Principals School Management Other teachers 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Share of mathematics top performers 72 Countries where teachers believe their profession is valued show higher levels of student achievement Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Relationship between lower secondary teachers' views on the value of their profession in society and the country s share of top mathematics performers in PISA 2012 45 Fig II.3.3 40 Singapore 35 30 Korea 25 Japan Flanders (Belgium) R 2 = 0.24 r= 0.49 20 15 10 5 0 Netherlands Poland Alberta (Canada) Estonia France Australia Finland Czech Republic Slovak Republic England (UK) Italy Denmark Norway Portugal Israel Sweden Iceland Spain Latvia United States Croatia Serbia Bulgaria Romania Chile Brazil Mexico 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Percentage of teachers who agree that teaching is valued in society

RECOMMENDATIONS School and teacher level Ensure continuity from past, now, and future Prioritize school leadership training Use the pilot as an opportunity to cultivate/ change a culture of teacher feedback Create a new path to teaching profession (as part of the preparation of retirement of a large teaching workforce) e.g. pedagogical support qualifications e.g. ICT, project management Collect exemplars e.g. specific features of good practices, emerging models of interdisciplinary subjects, different assessment practices; Capitalise on the existing channels e.g. school clusters, network of libraries, association of professional subjects to share good practices