Strong'performers'and'successful' reformers'in'educa3on'

1 IBAEM Conference Strong'performers'and'successful' reformers'in'educa3on' IBAEM, 17 October 2014, Rome ' Andreas(Schleicher( '

2 21 st century skills The'dilemma'for'educators' The'kinds'of'things'that'are'easy'to' teach'and'test'are'also'easy'to'digi3se,' automate'and'outsource'

3 The modern world no longer rewards people just for what they know, but for what they can do with what they know Mean task input in percentiles of 1960 task distribution 70 65 60 55 50 Routine manual Nonroutine manual Routine cognitive Nonroutine analytic Nonroutine interpersonal 45 40 35 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2006 2009 Source: Autor, David H. and Brendan M. Price. 2013. "The Changing Task Composition of the US Labor Market: An Update of Autor, Levy, and Murnane ( 2003)." MIT Mimeograph, June.

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status 4 Most teachers value 21 st century pedagogies Fig II.3.3 Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that: Average Average My role as a teacher is to facilitate students' own inquiry Students should be allowed to think of solutions to practical problems themselves before the teacher shows them how they are solved Thinking and reasoning processes are more important than specific curriculum content Students learn best by finding solutions to problems on their own 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after acc ounting for socio-economic status 5 but teaching practices do not always reflect that Fig II.3.3 Percentage of lower secondary teachers who report using the following teaching practices "frequently" or "in all or nearly all lessons" Italy Average Present a summary of recently learned content Check students' exercise books or homework Refer to a problem from everyday life or work to demonstrate why new knowledge is useful Let students practice similar tasks until teacher knows that every student has understood the subject matter Students work in small groups to come up with a joint solution to a problem or task Give different work to the students who have difficulties learning and/or to those who can advance faster Students use ICT for projects or class work Students work on projects that require at least one week to complete 0 20 40 60 80 100

6 Schooling outcomes Assessing'equity'and'excellence'

7 PISA in brief Over'half'a'million'students ' represen3ng'28'million'15cyearcolds'in'65'countries/economies' 'took'an'interna3onally'agreed'2chour'test ' Goes'beyond'tes3ng'whether'students'can'' reproduce'what'they'were'taught ' 'to'assess'students 'capacity'to'extrapolate'from'what'they'know' and'crea3vely'apply'their'knowledge'in'novel'situa3ons' Mathema3cs,'reading,(science,(problem4solving,(collabora6ve(( skills,(global(competencies( Total'of'390'minutes'of'assessment'material' 'and'responded'to'ques3ons'on ' their'personal'background,'their'schools'' and'their'engagement'with'learning'and'school' Parents,'principals'and'system'leaders'provided'data'on ' school'policies,'prac3ces,'resources''and'ins3tu3onal'factors'that' help'explain'performance'differences'.'

8 PISA in brief Key'principles' Crowd'sourcing 'and'collabora3on' PISA'draws'together'leading'exper3se'and'ins3tu3ons'from'par3cipa3ng' countries'to'develop'instruments'and'methodologies ' 'guided'by'governments'on'the'basis'of'shared'policy'interests' CrossCna3onal'relevance'and'transferability'of'policy'experiences' Emphasis'on'validity'across'cultures,'languages'and'systems' Frameworks'built'on'wellCstructured'conceptual'understanding' of'academic'disciplines'and'contextual'factors' Triangula3on'across'different'stakeholder'perspec3ves' Systema3c'integra3on'of'insights'from'students,'parents,'' school'principals'and'systemcleaders' Advanced'methods'with'different'grain'sizes' A'range'of'methods'to'adequately'measure'constructs'with'different'grain'sizes' to'serve'different'decisioncmaking'needs'' Produc3ve'feedback,'at'appropriate'levels'of'detail,'to'fuel'improvement'at' every'level'of'the'system'.'

Mean score 580 570 560 550 High mathematics performance "Shanghai)China"performs"above"this"line"(613)" Chinese Taipei Singapore Hong Kong-China Korea Average performance of 15-year-olds in Mathematics Fig I.2.13 540 530 520 510 500 490 480 470 460 450 440 430 420 410 Poland Belgium Germany Austria Slovenia New Zealand Denmark Czech Republic France Luxembourg Latvia Portugal Spain Slovak Republic United States Hungary Israel Greece Romania Chile Macao-China Japan Liechtenstein Switzerland Netherlands Estonia Finland Canada Viet Nam Australia Ireland United Kingdom Iceland Norway Italy Russian Fed. Lithuania Sweden Croatia Serbia Turkey Low mathematics performance Bulgaria U.A.E. Kazakhstan Thailand Malaysia Mexico " "12"countries"perform"below"this"line"

Austria( Islanda( Polonia( Olanda( Francia( Portogallo( Nuova(Zelanda( Francia( Islanda( Singapore( Repubblica( Ceca( Switzerland( Ungheria( Ungheria( Ungheria( Brasile( Perù( Grecia( Svezia( Grecia( Israele( Tailandia( Turchia(

High mathematics performance Chinese Taipei Singapore Hong Kong-China Korea Average performance of 15-year-olds in mathematics Strong socio-economic impact on student performance Poland Belgium Germany Austria Slovenia New Zealand Denmark Czech Republic France Luxembourg Latvia Portugal Spain Slovak Republic United States Hungary Israel Macao-China Japan Liechtenstein Switzerland Netherlands Estonia Finland Canada Viet Nam Australia Ireland United Kingdom Iceland Norway Italy Russian Fed. Lithuania Sweden Croatia Socially equitable distribution of learning opportunities Greece Romania Chile Serbia Turkey Bulgaria U.A.E. Kazakhstan Thailand Malaysia Mexico Low mathematics performance

2012 Singapore Chinese Taipei Korea Hong Kong-China Strong socio-economic impact on student performance 26 24 Slovak Rep. Japan Switzerland Liechtenstein Netherlands Estonia Poland Belgium Canada Finland Germany Viet Nam Denmark Austria New Zealand Australia Slovenia Ireland Czech Rep. Iceland 22 France 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 UK Luxembourg Latvia Norway Portugal Italy US Russian Fed. Spain Lithuania Sweden Hungary Croatia Israel Macao-China Socially equitable distribution of learning 2 opportunities 0 Chile Bulgaria Romania Greece Turkey Serbia United Arab Emirates Malaysia Kazakhstan Thailand Mexico

Australia Austria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Strong Israel socio-economic Italy impact on student Japan performance Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands Slovak Rep. New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Netherlands Estonia Poland Belgium Canada Finland Germany Denmark Austria Socially equitable New Zealand Australia Slovenia Ireland distribution of learning Czech Rep. Iceland France opportunities UK Luxembourg Norway Portugal Italy US Spain Sweden Hungary Chile Switzerland Israel Greece Turkey Korea Japan Mexico 2012

Australia Austria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Australia Austria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US

Australia Austria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands Slovak Rep. New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Shanghai" Singapore" Singapore" Korea Japan Switzerland Netherlands Estonia Poland Belgium Canada Finland Germany Denmark Austria New Zealand Australia Slovenia Ireland Czech Rep. Iceland France UK Luxembourg Norway Portugal Italy US Spain Sweden Hungary Israel Chile Turkey'2003' Chile'2001' Greece Turkey Mexico 2003-2012

17 Fostering resilience The'country'where'students'go'to'class'maXers' more'than'what'social'class'students'come'from'

18 Resilience in education PISA performance by decile of social background Mexico Chile Greece Norway Sweden Iceland Israel Italy United States Spain Denmark Luxembourg Australia Ireland United Kingdom Hungary Canada Finland Austria Turkey Liechtenstein Czech Republic Estonia Portugal Slovenia Slovak Republic New Zealand Germany Netherlands France Switzerland Poland Belgium Japan Macao-China Hong Kong-China Korea Singapore Chinese Taipei Shanghai-China 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575 600 625 650 675 Source: PISA 2012

19 Must(haves( High(impact(on(outcomes( Quick(wins( Lessons from high performers Low(feasibility( Catching(up(with(the(top4performers( High(feasibility( Money(pits( Low(hanging(fruits(

20 Must(haves( High(impact(on(outcomes( Quick(wins( Commitment(to(universal(achievement( Lessons from high performers Capacity(( at(point(of(delivery( Coherence( Low(feasibility( Resources(( where(they(yield(most( Gateways,(instruc6onal( systems( A(learning(system( High(feasibility( Incen6ve(structures(and( accountability( Money(pits( Low(hanging(fruits(

21 Lessons from high performers Low(feasibility( High(impact(on(outcomes( A(commitment(to(educa6on(and(the(belief(that( Must(haves( Quick(wins( competencies(can(be(learned(and(therefore(all( Commitment(to(universal(achievement( children(can(achieve( Capacity((! at(point(of(delivery( Universal(educa6onal(standards(and(personaliza6on(as( Resources(( the(approach(to(heterogeneity(in(the(student(body ( where(they(yield(most( (as(opposed(to(a(belief(that(students(have(different( Gateways,(instruc6onal( des6na6ons(to(be(met(with(different(expecta6ons,(and( systems( selec6on/stra6fica6on(as(the(approach(to( heterogeneity( Coherence( A(learning(system(! Clear(ar6cula6on(who(is(responsible(for(ensuring( student(success(and(to(whom( High(feasibility( Incen6ve(structures(and( accountability( Money(pits( Low(hanging(fruits(

Countries where students have stronger beliefs Fig III.4.5 22 in their abilities perform better in mathematics Mean index of mathematics self-efficacy Mean mathematics performance 650 600 550 500 450 400 350 OECD average Shanghai-China Singapore Hong Kong-China Korea Chinese Taipei Japan Macao-China Switzerland Netherlands Estonia Finland Canada Liechtenstein Belgium Poland Germany Viet Nam Denmark Slovenia New Zealand Latvia Italy Portugal Austria Australia Russian Fed. Hungary Croatia Luxembourg Greece Slovak Republic Spain Turkey Israel Sweden Norway Serbia Lithuania Czech Republic U.A.E. United Kingdom Thailand Malaysia Romania Iceland Chile Bulgaria Kazakhstan Ireland United States Montenegro France Costa Rica Brazil Uruguay Mexico Albania Argentina Tunisia Colombia Qatar Jordan Indonesia Peru R² = 0.36 300-0.60-0.40-0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

23 Perceived self-responsibility for failure in mathematics Fig III.3.6 Percentage of students who reported "agree" or "strongly agree" with the following statements: Italy Japan OECD average Sometimes I am just unlucky The teacher did not get students interested in the material Sometimes the course material is too hard This week I made bad guesses on the quiz My teacher did not explain the concepts well this week I m not very good at solving mathematics problems 0 20 40 60 80 %

Boys tend to have greater beliefs Fig III.7.7 24 in their mathematics abilities than girls Difference in the mean index 0.60 Gender gap adjusted for differences in mathematics performance between boys and girls Gender gap Mean index difference (boys-girls) 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 B 0.00 Malaysia Albania Indonesia Kazakhstan Romania Portugal Peru Poland Viet Nam Turkey Slovak Republic Thailand Colombia Montenegro Spain Shanghai-China Mexico Bulgaria Tunisia Argentina Korea Macao-China Serbia Slovenia Italy Chile Hungary Brazil Chinese Taipei Greece Russian Fed. United States Ireland Uruguay Singapore Costa Rica Japan U.A.E. Jordan Croatia Canada Lithuania Israel OECD average Estonia Latvia Sweden Luxembourg Norway Czech Republic Denmark Qatar Hong Kong-China Austria New Zealand United Kingdom Australia Netherlands Belgium France Switzerland Liechtenstein Finland Germany Iceland

Greater self-efficacy among girls could shrink the gender gap in mathematics Fig III.7.12 25 performance, particularly among the highest-performing students Gender gap among the highest-achieving students (90th percentile) 40 Gender gap adjusted for differences in mathematics self-efficacy between boys and girls Gender gap Score-point difference (boys-girls) 30 20 10 0-10 Boys(do(beMer( Girls(do(beMer( B -20 Colombia Costa Rica Peru Israel Luxembourg Chile Tunisia Slovak Republic Liechtenstein Italy Korea Spain Argentina Brazil Portugal Greece Japan Austria Uruguay Mexico Hong Kong-China Bulgaria Turkey Indonesia Hungary Viet Nam United States Romania U.A.E. Chinese Taipei Canada Ireland Belgium Kazakhstan Czech Republic OECD average Croatia France Shanghai-China Montenegro Poland Serbia Malaysia Estonia Qatar Macao-China Netherlands New Zealand Norway Lithuania Slovenia Denmark Jordan Switzerland Australia Germany Latvia Russian Fed. Sweden Singapore United Kingdom Thailand Finland Iceland

Percentage of girls and boys who intend to take additional mathematics, rather than language, courses after they leave school % 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Girls Boys 0 Turkey Jordan * Costa Rica * Thailand Kazakhstan * Iceland Shanghai-China * Viet Nam Albania * United Arab Emirates * Qatar Malaysia * Norway Israel Cyprus Indonesia * Portugal * Colombia Japan Netherlands Croatia Latvia Uruguay Argentina Denmark Peru Mexico Tunisia Estonia Chile Liechtenstein Macao-China Poland Luxembourg France Spain Italy Sweden Belgium United States Czech Republic Chinese Taipei Singapore OECD average Slovenia Canada Greece Lithuania Bulgaria Switzerland Finland United Kingdom Slovak Republic Romania Russian Federation Austria Montenegro Brazil Ireland Germany Hong Kong-China Australia New Zealand Serbia Korea Hungary

27 A continuum of support Make'learning'central,'encourage' engagement'and'responsibility' Be'acutely'sensi3ve'to'individual' differences' Provide'con3nual'assessment'with' forma3ve'feedback' Be'demanding'for'every'student' Ensure'that'students'feel'valued'and' included'and'learning'is'collabora3ve' 27

28 Must(haves( High(impact(on(outcomes( Quick(wins( Lessons from high performers Low(feasibility( Capacity(( at(point(of(delivery( Coherence( Commitment(to(universal(achievement( Clear(ambi6ous(goals(that(are(shared(across(the( system(and(aligned(with(high(stakes(gateways(and( Resources(( instruc6onal(systems( where(they(yield(most(! Well(established(delivery(chain(through(which( Gateways,(instruc6onal( curricular(goals(translate(into(instruc6onal(systems,( systems( instruc6onal(prac6ces(and(student(learning((intended,( implemented(and(achieved)( A(learning(system(! High(level(of(metacogni6ve(content(of(instruc6on( ( High(feasibility( Incen6ve(structures(and( accountability( Money(pits( Low(hanging(fruits(

29 Capacity(at(the(point(of(delivery( Lessons from high performers High(impact(on(outcomes( Must(haves( Quick(wins(! AMrac6ng,(developing(and(retaining(high(quality( teachers(and(school(leaders(and(a(work(organisa6on(in( Commitment(to(universal(achievement( which(they(can(use(their(poten6al( Capacity((! Instruc6onal((leadership(and(human(resource( at(point(of(delivery( Resources(( management(in(schools( where(they(yield(most(! Keeping(teaching(an(aMrac6ve(profession( Gateways,(instruc6onal(! System4wide(career(development( ( systems( Coherence( A(learning(system( Low(feasibility( High(feasibility( Incen6ve(structures(and( accountability( Money(pits( Low(hanging(fruits(

Teacher shortage Fig IV.3.5 Mean index Top quarter of this index Bottom quarter of this index 3 2.5 2 1.5 Mean index 1 0.5 0-0.5-1 -1.5 Luxembourg Jordan Thailand Turkey Shanghai-China Israel Colombia Peru Chile Netherlands Mexico Germany Viet Nam Russian Fed. Uruguay Norway Kazakhstan Indonesia Belgium Italy Malaysia Australia Brazil Iceland U.A.E. Singapore New Zealand Korea Switzerland Estonia Macao-China Costa Rica OECD average Sweden Argentina Tunisia Austria Qatar Ireland Chinese Taipei France Denmark United Kingdom Hong Kong-China Albania Japan Canada Slovak Republic Latvia Greece United States Czech Republic Croatia Finland Montenegro Romania Hungary Lithuania Slovenia Spain Serbia Portugal Bulgaria Poland

31 Adequate resources to address disadvantage 1.5 A'shortage'of'qualified'teachers'is'more'of'concern' 'in'disadvantaged'schools' Difference(between(socio4economically(disadvantaged(and(socio4economically(advantaged(schools( 1.3 Mean index difference 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.3 Disadvantaged schools reported more teacher shortage 0.1-0.1-0.3-0.5 Advantaged schools reported more teacher shortage Korea Estonia Israel Latvia Slovenia Italy Poland Singapore Argentina Netherlands Portugal Colombia France Finland Tunisia Macao-China Spain Greece Switzerland Norway Russian Fed. Japan Austria Montenegro Croatia Canada OECD average Germany Denmark Hungary United Kingdom Luxembourg Hong Kong-China Belgium Iceland Viet Nam Ireland United States Chile Czech Republic Serbia Turkey Mexico Indonesia Uruguay Shanghai-China Slovak Republic Sweden Brazil New Zealand Australia Chinese Taipei

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, 32 Teachers' after accounting perceptions for socio-economic of the value status of teaching Fig II.3.3 Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that teaching profession is a valued profession in society 100 90 80 Percentage of teachers 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Malaysia Singapore Korea Abu Dhabi (UAE) Finland Mexico Alberta (Canada) Flanders (Belgium) Netherlands Australia England (UK) Romania Israel United States Chile Average Norway Japan Latvia Serbia Bulgaria Denmark Poland Iceland Estonia Brazil Italy Above-average performers in PISA Czech Republic Portugal Croatia Spain Sweden France Slovak Republic

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

34 Teacher co-operation Percentage of lower secondary teachers who report doing the following activities at least once per month 100 90 80 Exchange and co-ordination Average Professional collaboration 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Discuss individual students Share resources Team conferences Collaborate for common standards Team teaching Collaborative PD Joint activities Classroom observations Percentage of teachers

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after acc ounting for socio-economic status 35 Drivers of job satisfaction Fig II.3.3 The more frequently that tea chers report participating in collaborative practices wit h their colleagues, the higher their level of se lf-efficacy. The same is true for job satisfaction.

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after acc ounting for socio-economic status 36 Teachers' needs for professional development Fig II.3.3 Percentage of lower secondary teachers indicating they have a high level of need for professional development in the fol lowing areas Average Teaching students with special needs ICT skills for teaching New technologies in the workplace Student behaviour and classroom management Teaching in a multicultural or multilingual setting Approaches to individualised learning Student career guidance and counselling Student evaluation and assessment practice Teaching cross-curricular skills Developing competencies for future work Pedagogical competencies School management and administration Knowledge of the subject field(s) Knowledge of the curriculum 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after acc ounting for socio-economic status 37 Impact of professional development Fig II.3.3 Regardless of the cont ent, over 3/4 of teache rs report that the professional development in which they have participated h as had a positive impact on thei r teaching.

38 Teachers Mean mathematics feedback performance, : by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status direct classroom observations Fig II.3.3 Principals School Management Other teachers 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Bulgaria Poland United States Romania Alberta (Canada) Croatia Czech Republic Abu Dhabi (UAE) Flanders (Belgium) 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

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, 39 Feedback after accounting and change for socio-economic in behavior status Fig II.3.3 Percentage of lower secondary teachers who report a "moderate" or "large" positive change in the following i ssues after they received feedback on their work Average Italy 100 90 Personal Pedagogical Professional 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Confidence as a teacher Motivation Job satisfaction Knowledge and understanding of main subject field(s) Teaching practices Student assessments to improve student learning Classroom management practices Methods for teaching students with special needs Public recognition Job responsibilities Role in school development initiatives Amount of professional development Likelihood of career advancement Salary and/or financial bonus

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, 40 Consequences after accounting of for feedback socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that: Italy Average A development or training plan is established to improve their work as a teacher A mentor is appointed to help teachers improve his/her teaching Teacher appraisal and feedback have little impact upon the way teachers teach in the classroom The best performing teachers in this school receive the greatest recognition If a teacher is consistently underperforming, he/she would be dismissed 0 20 40 60 80

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after acc ounting for socio-economic status 41 Teachers and feedback Fig II.3.3 On average across TALIS countries, Just above half of the teachers report receiving feedback on t heir teaching from one or two sources...and only one in 5 receive f eedback from three sources.

42 Math(teaching( (math(teaching( PISA(=(reason(mathema6cally(and(understand,(formulate,(employ( and(interpret(mathema6cal(concepts,(facts(and(procedures(

43 Focus&on& word&problems & Fig I.3.1a Index of exposure to word problems 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 Formal(math(situated(in(a(word( problem,(where(it(is(obvious(to( students(what(mathema6cal( knowledge(and(skills(are(needed( 0.50 0.00 Viet Nam Macao-China Shanghai-China Turkey Uruguay Greece Hong Kong-China Chinese Taipei Portugal Brazil Serbia Bulgaria Singapore Netherlands Japan Argentina Costa Rica Lithuania Tunisia New Zealand Czech Republic Israel Korea Latvia Qatar Italy United States Estonia Ireland Australia Mexico United Arab Emirates Norway Malaysia Kazakhstan United Kingdom Romania OECD average Albania Colombia Indonesia Sweden Belgium Peru Thailand Denmark Russian Federation Canada Slovak Republic Hungary Germany Croatia Luxembourg Montenegro Chile Poland Finland Austria Slovenia France Switzerland Jordan Liechtenstein Spain Iceland

44 Focus&on& conceptual&understanding & Fig I.3.1b Index of exposure to formal mathematics 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Sweden Iceland Tunisia Argentina Switzerland Brazil Luxembourg Ireland Netherlands New Zealand Costa Rica Austria Liechtenstein Malaysia Indonesia Denmark United Kingdom Uruguay Lithuania Germany Australia Chile OECD average Slovak Republic Thailand Qatar Finland Portugal Colombia Mexico Peru Czech Republic Israel Italy Belgium Hong Kong-China Poland France Spain Montenegro Greece Turkey Slovenia Viet Nam Hungary Bulgaria Kazakhstan Chinese Taipei Canada United States Estonia Romania Latvia Serbia Japan Korea Croatia Albania Russian Federation United Arab Emirates Jordan Macao-China Singapore Shanghai-China

45 Lessons from high performers Must(haves( High(impact(on(outcomes( Commitment(to(universal(achievement(! Aligned(incen6ve(structures( Capacity(( For(students( at(point(of(delivery( Resources(( Quick(wins( Incen6ves,(accountability,(knowledge(management(! How(gateways(affect(the(strength,(direc6on,(clarity(and(nature(of(the(incen6ves( opera6ng(on(students(at(each(stage(of(their(educa6on(( where(they(yield(most(! Degree(to(which(students(have(incen6ves(to(take(tough(courses(and(study(hard(! Opportunity(costs(for(staying(in(school(and(performing(well( For(teachers( Gateways,(instruc6onal( systems( Coherence(! Make(innova6ons(in(pedagogy(and/or(organisa6on(( A(learning(system(! Improve(their(own(performance(( and(the(performance(of(their(colleagues( Low(feasibility( High(feasibility(! Pursue(professional(development(opportuni6es(( that(lead(to(stronger(pedagogical(prac6ces( Incen6ve(structures(and(! A(balance(between(ver6cal(and(lateral(accountability( accountability(! Effec6ve(instruments(to(manage(and(share(knowledge(and(spread( innova6on( (communica6on(within(the(system(and(with( stakeholders(around(it( Money(pits( Low(hanging(fruits(! A(capable(centre(with(authority(and(legi6macy(to(act((

46 Align autonomy with accountability Lessons from high performers The'ques3on'is'not'how'many'charter'schools'you'have'but'how' you'enable'every'teacher'to'assume'charterclike'autonomy'

47 Countries that grant schools autonomy over curricula and assessments tend to perform better in mathematics Lessons from high performers Mathematics performance (score points) 650 600 550 500 450 400 350 Shanghai-China Chinese Taipei Viet Nam Korea Singapore Estonia Hong Kong-China Japan Latvia Poland Canada Slovenia Czech Rep. Switzerland Belgium Portugal Germany Finland New Zealand Lithuania Croatia Austria Hungary Netherlands Serbia Spain France Australia Italy UK Turkey Norway Macao-China Greece Bulgaria Denmark Iceland Thailand Kazakhstan Romania Slovak Rep. R² = 0.13 Israel Malaysia Uruguay USA Sweden Chile Jordan Costa Rica Brazil Indonesia Luxembourg Tunisia Albania Colombia UAE Argentina Peru Qatar 300-1.5-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 Index of school responsibility for curriculum and assessment (index points) Source: PISA 2012

Schools with more autonomy perform better than schools with less autonomy in systems with standardised math policies Fig IV.1.16 School autonomy for curriculum and assessment x system's extent of implementing a standardised math policy (e.g. curriculum and instructional materials) Score points 485 480 475 470 465 460 455 Less school autonomy Standardised math policy No standardised math policy More school autonomy

Schools with more autonomy perform better than schools with less autonomy in systems with more collaboration Fig IV.1.17 School autonomy for resource allocation x System's level of teachers participating in school management Across all participating countries and economies 485 Score points 480 475 470 465 460 455 Less school autonomy Teachers participate in management Teachers don't participate in management More school autonomy

50 Quality assurance and school improvement Fig IV.4.14 ercentage of students in schools whose principal reported that their schools have the following for quality assurance and improvement: Italy Singapore OECD average Implementation of a standardised policy for mathematics Regular consultation with one or more experts over a period of at least six months with the aim of improving Teacher mentoring Written feedback from students (e.g. regarding lessons, teachers or resources) External evaluation Internal evaluation/self-evaluation Systematic recording of data, including teacher and student attendance and graduation rates, test results and Written specification of student-performance standards Written specification of the school's curriculum and educational goals 0 20 40 60 80 100 %

51 Lessons from high performers High(impact(on(outcomes( Must(haves( Quick(wins( Commitment(to(universal(achievement( Inves6ng(resources(where(they(can(make(most( of(a(difference( Capacity(( at(point(of(delivery(! Alignment(of(resources(with(key(challenges((e.g.( Resources(( amrac6ng(the(most(talented(teachers(to(the(most( where(they(yield(most( challenging(classrooms)( Gateways,(instruc6onal(! Effec6ve(spending(choices(that(priori6se(high(quality( systems( teachers(over(smaller(classes( Coherence( A(learning(system( Low(feasibility( High(feasibility( Incen6ve(structures(and( accountability( Money(pits( Low(hanging(fruits(

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, 52 What after teachers accounting do beyond for socio-economic teaching status Fig II.3.3 Average number of 60-minute hours teachers report spending on the following tasks in an average week Finland Malaysia School management Flanders (Belgium) Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates) Communication with parents Italy Israel Malaysia All other tasks Sweden Malaysia Japan Extracurricular activities Finland Korea Student counselling Finland Malaysia Team work Finland Korea Finland Malaysia Singapore Portugal Administrative work Marking Finland Japan Croatia 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Number of hours Planning

53 Align the resources with the challenges 700 650 Countries'with'beXer'performance'in'mathema3cs'tend'to' allocate'educa3onal'resources'more'equitably'' Shanghai-China Mathematics performance (score points) 600 550 500 450 400 Mexico Costa Rica Peru Chinese Taipei Viet Nam Korea Singapore R² = 0.19 Hong Kong-China Estonia Japan Poland Switzerland Slovenia Latvia Finland Canada Belgium Germany New Zealand Macao-China Slovak UK Rep. Ireland Iceland France Austria Australia Israel Denmark Spain Romania Croatia Sweden Hungary USA Turkey Greece Bulgaria Portugal Italy Norway Thailand Serbia Chile Malaysia Uruguay Kazakhstan Brazil Jordan Indonesia UAE Montenegro Colombia Argentina Tunisia Luxembourg 350 300 1.5 1 Qatar 0.5 Adjusted by per capita GDP 0-0.5 Less equity Equity in resource allocation (index points) Greater equity Source: PISA 2012

54 Square school choice with equity Controlled( choice( Financial' incen3ves' for'schools' Use(student( and(school( assessments( Financial( incen6ves( Assistance'for' disadvantaged' parents' Foster( collabora6on( among( teachers(and( schools( Inform( parents( 54

55 Must(haves( High(impact(on(outcomes( Quick(wins( Commitment(to(universal(achievement( Lessons from high performers Capacity(( at(point(of(delivery( Low(feasibility( A(learning(system( Resources(( where(they(yield(most( Gateways,(instruc6onal(! An(outward(orienta6on(to(keep(the(system(learning,( technology,(interna6onal(benchmarks(as(the( eyes (and( systems( Coherence( ears (of(the(system( A(learning(system(! Recognising(challenges(and(poten6al(future(threats(to( current(success,(learning(from(them,(designing( responses(and(implemen6ng(these( Incen6ve(structures(and( accountability( High(feasibility( Money(pits( Low(hanging(fruits(

56 Must(haves( High(impact(on(outcomes( Quick(wins( Commitment(to(universal(achievement( Lessons from high performers Low(feasibility( Capacity(( at(point(of(delivery( Coherence(of(policies(and(prac6ces(! Alignment(of(policies(( across(all(aspects(of(the(system(! Coherence(of(policies(( over(sustained(periods(of(6me(! Consistency(of(implementa6on((! Fidelity(of(implementa6on(( (without(excessive(control)( Resources(( where(they(yield(most( A(learning(system( Gateways,(instruc6onal( systems( High(feasibility( Incen6ve(structures(and( accountability( Money(pits( Low(hanging(fruits(

57 Must(haves( High(impact(on(outcomes( Quick(wins( Commitment(to(universal(achievement( Lessons from high performers Capacity(( at(point(of(delivery( Coherence( Low(feasibility( Resources(( where(they(yield(most( Gateways,(instruc6onal( systems( A(learning(system( High(feasibility( Incen6ve(structures(and( accountability( Money(pits( Low(hanging(fruits(

58 Lessons from high performers Average'school'systems' Some(students(learn(( at(high(levels( "( High'performers'in'PISA' All(students(learn( (at(high(levels( Uniformity( "( Embracing(diversity( Curriculum4centred( "( Learner4centred( Learning(a(place( "( Learning(an(ac6vity( Prescrip6on( "( Informed(profession(

59 What(it(all(means( The(old(bureaucra6c(system( Student(inclusion( The(modern(enabling(system( Lessons from high performers Some(students(learn(at(high(levels( Rou6ne(cogni6ve(skills,(rote(learning( Few(years(more(than(secondary( Tayloris6c,(hierarchical( Curriculum,(instruc6on(and(assessment( Teacher(quality( Work(organisa6on( All'students(need(to(learn(at(high(levels( Learning(to(learn,(complex(ways(of(thinking,(ways( of(working( High4level(professional(knowledge(workers( Flat,(collegial( Accountability( Primarily(to(authori6es( Primarily(to(peers(and(stakeholders(

60 Thank you Lessons from high performers Find(out(more(about(our(work(at(www.oecd.org( All(publica6ons( The(complete(micro4level(database( Email:(Andreas.Schleicher@OECD.org' TwiMer:(SchleicherEDU' and(remember:( Without(data,(you(are(just(another(person(with(an(opinion(