How to best shape effective learning and teaching?...organisation's innovation activities face higher skill requirements than non-innovative graduates Source: Avvisati, F., G. Jacotin

1 1 NIER Symposium

How to best shape effective learning and teaching?

NIER Symposium

17 November 2014, Tokyo

Andreas Schleicher

2 2 21st century skills

The context

The kinds of things that are easy to teach and test are also easy to digitise,

automate and outsource

100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 100

PolandIreland

Slovak RepublicEstonia

KoreaUnited States

AustriaCzech Republic

AverageFlanders (Belgium)

JapanEngland/N. Ireland (UK)

GermanyCanada

AustraliaDenmark

NorwayNetherlands

FinlandSweden

Basic digitalproblem-solvingskills

Advanceddigital problem-solving skills

Young adults (16-24 year-olds) All adults (16-65 year-olds)

Problem solving skills in a digital environment

%

3

Evolution of employment in occupational groups defined by problem-solving skills

4

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25Medium-lowlevel ofproblem-solving

Low level ofproblem-solving

Medium-highlevel ofproblem-solving

%

5 Changes in the demand for skills Trends in different tasks in occupations (United States)

-1.2

-0.7

-0.2

0.3

0.8

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005

Nonroutine analyticNonroutine interactiveRoutine cognitiveRoutine manualNonroutine manual

Percentage point changes in mean task inputs across occupations relative to 1960

Source: OECD (2014a), PISA 2012 Results: Skills for Life (Volume V): Student Performance in Problem Solving

6 Critical skills for the most innovative jobs, by type of innovation

Critical skills for the most innovative jobs, by type of innovation: Tertiary-educated workers who contribute to their organisation's innovation activities face higher skill requirements than non-innovative graduates Source: Avvisati, F., G. Jacotin and S. Vincent-Lancrin (2013), “Educating Higher Education Students for Innovative Economies: What International Data Tell Us”, Tuning Journal for Higher Education, No. 1, November 2013, pp. 223-240

2.9

2.3

1.9

1.9

2.3

1.9

2.3

1.9

1.7

1.9

1.7

2.0

2.4

1.8

1.7

1.6

1.4

1.7

1.5

1 2 4

technology or tools

3.6

2.9

2.9

2.6

2.7

2.5

2.9

2.4

2.4

2.5

2.5

2.1

2.0

2.1

2.2

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

1 2 4

knowledge or methods

3.2

2.6

2.5

2.7

2.0

2.4

2.1

2.3

2.0

1.9

1.9

1.7

1.8

2.0

1.8

1.8

2.3

1.9

1.7

124

come with news ideas/solutionswillingness to question ideaspresent ideas in audiencealertness to opportunitiesanalytical thinkingcoordinate activitiesacquire new knowledgemobilize capacities of othersmake your meaning clearmaster of your own fieldwrite reports or documentswrite and speak a foreign languageuse computers and internetwork productively with othersuse time efficientlyperform under pressurenegociateknowledge of other fieldsassert your authority

product or service

3.9

3.0

2.8

2.7

2.6

2.6

2.5

2.4

2.4

2.4

2.4

2.2

2.2

2.2

2.1

2.1

2.1

2.1

1.8

124

any type of innovation

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 7 7 Most teachers value 21st century pedagogies…

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that:

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Students learn best by finding solutions to problems on theirown

Thinking and reasoning processes are more important thanspecific curriculum content

Students should be allowed to think of solutions to practicalproblems themselves before the teacher shows them how they

are solved

My role as a teacher is to facilitate students' own inquiry

Japan Average

0 20 40 60 80 100

Students work on projects that require at least one week tocomplete

Students use ICT for projects or class work

Give different work to the students who have difficultieslearning and/or to those who can advance faster

Students work in small groups to come up with a jointsolution to a problem or task

Let students practice similar tasks until teacher knows thatevery student has understood the subject matter

Refer to a problem from everyday life or work to demonstratewhy new knowledge is useful

Check students' exercise books or homework

Present a summary of recently learned content

Japan Average

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 8 8 …but teaching practices do not always reflect that

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who report using the following teaching practices "frequently" or "in all or nearly all lessons"

9 9 Schooling outcomes

Combining equity and excellence

Singapore

Hong Kong-China Chinese Taipei Korea

Macao-China Japan Liechtenstein Switzerland

Netherlands Estonia Finland Canada Poland Belgium Germany Viet Nam

Austria Australia Ireland Slovenia Denmark New Zealand

Czech Republic France United Kingdom Iceland Latvia Luxembourg Norway

Portugal Italy Spain Russian Fed. Slovak Republic United States Lithuania Sweden Hungary Croatia

Israel

Greece Serbia Turkey

Romania Bulgaria U.A.E. Kazakhstan Thailand

Chile Malaysia Mexico

410

420

430

440

450

460

470

480

490

500

510

520

530

540

550

560

570

580Mean score

High mathematics performance

Low mathematics performance

… Shanghai-China performs above this line (613)

… 12 countries perform below this line

Average performance of 15-year-olds in

Mathematics Fig I.2.13

Socially equitable distribution of learning

opportunities

High mathematics performance

Low mathematics performance

Average performance of 15-year-olds in

mathematics

Strong socio-economic impact on student

performance

Singapore

Hong Kong-China Chinese Taipei Korea

Macao-China Japan Liechtenstein Switzerland

Netherlands Estonia Finland Canada Poland Belgium Germany Viet Nam

Austria Australia Ireland Slovenia Denmark New Zealand

Czech Republic France United Kingdom Iceland Latvia Luxembourg Norway

Portugal Italy Spain Russian Fed. Slovak Republic United States Lithuania Sweden Hungary Croatia

Israel

Greece Serbia Turkey

Romania Bulgaria U.A.E. Kazakhstan Thailand

Chile Malaysia Mexico

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

Singapore

Hong Kong-China Chinese Taipei

Macao-China Liechtenstein

Viet Nam

Latvia

Russian Fed. Lithuania

Croatia

Serbia Romania

Bulgaria United Arab Emirates Kazakhstan

Thailand Malaysia

02468101214161820222426

2012


opportunities


performance

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

2012


opportunities


performance

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


Singapore

Shanghai

Singapore

2003 - 2012

Increase percentage correct

0.8

1.7 1.7

6.5

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Multiple-choice - reproducing knowledge

Open-ended - constructing knowledge (21st century skills)

OECD Japan

OECD OECD Japan

Japan

Changes in instructional practice – PISA 2006-9

17 17 Keep track of ‘added value’

The country where students go to class matters more than what social class students come from

18 18 Resilience in education PISA performance by decile of social background

300

325

350

375

400

425

450

475

500

525

550

575

600

625

650

675

Mex

ico

Chile

Gre

ece

Norw

aySw

eden

Icel

and

Isra

elItal

yU

nited

Sta

tes

Spai

nD

enm

ark

Luxe

mbourg

Aust

ralia

Irel

and

United

Kin

gdom

Hungar

yCan

ada

Finla

nd

Aust

ria

Turk

eyLi

echte

nst

ein

Cze

ch R

epublic

Esto

nia

Port

ugal

Slove

nia

Slova

k Rep

ublic

New

Zea

land

Ger

man

yN

ether

lands

Fran

ceSw

itze

rlan

dPola

nd

Bel

giu

mJa

pan

Mac

ao-C

hin

aH

ong K

ong-C

hin

aKore

aSi

ngap

ore

Chin

ese

Taip

eiSh

anghai

-Chin

a

Source: PISA 2012

19 19 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s

Catching up with the top-performers

Low impact on outcomes

High impact on outcomes

Low feasibility High feasibility

Money pits

Must haves

Low hanging fruits

Quick wins

20 20 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money pits

Must haves

Low hanging fruits

Quick wins

Commitment to universal achievement

Gateways, instructional systems

Capacity at point of delivery

Incentive structures and accountability

Resources where they yield most

A learning system Coherence

21 21 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money pits

Must haves

Low hanging fruits

Quick wins







A commitment to education and the belief that competencies can be learned and therefore all children can achieve Universal educational standards and personalization as

the approach to heterogeneity in the student body… … as opposed to a belief that students have different

destinations to be met with different expectations, and selection/stratification as the approach to heterogeneity

Clear articulation who is responsible for ensuring student success and to whom

United States

Poland

Hong Kong-China

Brazil

New Zealand

Greece

Uruguay

United Kingdom

Estonia Finland

Albania

Croatia

Latvia

Slovak Republic Luxembourg

Germany

Lithuania

Austria

Czech Republic

Chinese Taipei

France Thailand

Japan

Turkey Sweden

Hungary Australia

Israel

Canada

Ireland Bulgaria

Jordan

Chile

Macao-China

U.A.E.

Belgium Netherlands

Spain

Argentina

Indonesia

Denmark

Kazakhstan

Peru

Costa Rica

Switzerland

Montenegro

Tunisia

Iceland

Slovenia

Qatar

Singapore

Portugal

Norway

Colombia

Malaysia

Mexico

Liechtenstein

Korea

Serbia

Russian Fed.

Romania

Viet Nam

Italy

Shanghai-China

R² = 0.36

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

-0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Mea

n m

athe

mat

ics

perf

orm

ance

Mean index of mathematics self-efficacy

OEC

D a

vera

ge

Countries where students have stronger beliefs in their abilities perform better in mathematics 22 Fig III.4.5

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

Mal

aysi

aA

lban

iaIn

done

sia

Kaz

akhs

tan

Rom

ania

Por

tuga

lP

eru

Pol

and

Vie

t Nam

Turk

eyS

lova

k R

epub

licTh

aila

ndC

olom

bia

Mon

tene

gro

Spa

inS

hang

hai-C

hina

Mex

ico

Bul

garia

Tuni

sia

Arg

entin

aK

orea

Mac

ao-C

hina

Ser

bia

Slo

veni

aIta

lyC

hile

Hun

gary

Bra

zil

Chi

nese

Tai

pei

Gre

ece

Rus

sian

Fed

.U

nite

d S

tate

sIre

land

Uru

guay

Sin

gapo

reC

osta

Ric

aJa

pan

U.A

.E.

Jord

anC

roat

iaC

anad

aLi

thua

nia

Isra

elO

EC

D a

vera

geE

ston

iaLa

tvia

Sw

eden

Luxe

mbo

urg

Nor

way

Cze

ch R

epub

licD

enm

ark

Qat

arH

ong

Kon

g-C

hina

Aus

tria

New

Zea

land

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

Aus

tralia

Net

herla

nds

Bel

gium

Fran

ceS

witz

erla

ndLi

echt

enst

ein

Finl

and

Ger

man

yIc

elan

d

Mea

n in

dex

diffe

renc

e (b

oys-

girls

)

Difference in the mean index

Gender gap adjusted for differences in mathematics performance between boys and girlsGender gap

Boys tend to have greater beliefs in their mathematics abilities than girls 23 Fig III.7.7

B

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

Col

ombi

aC

osta

Ric

aP

eru

Isra

elLu

xem

bour

gC

hile

Tuni

sia

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Liec

hten

stei

nIta

lyK

orea

Spa

inA

rgen

tina

Bra

zil

Por

tuga

lG

reec

eJa

pan

Aus

tria

Uru

guay

Mex

ico

Hon

g K

ong-

Chi

naB

ulga

riaTu

rkey

Indo

nesi

aH

unga

ryV

iet N

amU

nite

d S

tate

sR

oman

iaU

.A.E

.C

hine

se T

aipe

iC

anad

aIre

land

Bel

gium

Kaz

akhs

tan

Cze

ch R

epub

licO

EC

D a

vera

geC

roat

iaFr

ance

Sha

ngha

i-Chi

naM

onte

negr

oP

olan

dS

erbi

aM

alay

sia

Est

onia

Qat

arM

acao

-Chi

naN

ethe

rland

sN

ew Z

eala

ndN

orw

ayLi

thua

nia

Slo

veni

aD

enm

ark

Jord

anS

witz

erla

ndA

ustra

liaG

erm

any

Latv

iaR

ussi

an F

ed.

Sw

eden

Sin

gapo

reU

nite

d K

ingd

omTh

aila

ndFi

nlan

dIc

elan

d

Scor

e-po

int d

iffer

ence

(boy

s-gi

rls)

Gender gap among the highest-achieving students (90th percentile)

Gender gap adjusted for differences in mathematics self-efficacy between boys and girlsGender gap

Greater self-efficacy among girls could shrink the gender gap in mathematics performance, particularly among the highest-performing students 24 Fig III.7.12

B

Boys do better

Girls do better

Percentage of girls and boys who intend to take additional mathematics, rather than language, courses after they leave school

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Turk

eyJo

rdan

*Cost

a Ric

a *

Thai

land

Kaz

akhs

tan

*Ic

elan

dSh

angha

i-Chi

na *

Vie

t N

amAlb

ania

*Uni

ted A

rab E

mirat

es *

Qat

arM

alay

sia

*N

orw

ayIsra

elCyp

rus

Indone

sia

*Po

rtug

al *

Colo

mbia

Japan

Net

herlan

ds

Cro

atia

Latv

iaUru

gua

yArg

entina

Den

mar

kPe

ruM

exic

oTu

nisia

Esto

nia

Chi

leLi

echt

enst

ein

Mac

ao-C

hina

Pola

ndLu

xem

bour

gFr

ance

Spai

nItal

ySw

eden

Belg

ium

Uni

ted S

tate

sCze

ch R

epub

licChi

nese

Tai

pei

Sing

apore

OEC

D a

vera

ge

Slove

nia

Can

ada

Gre

ece

Lith

uani

aBu

lgar

iaSw

itze

rlan

dFi

nlan

dUni

ted K

ingdom

Slova

k Rep

ublic

Rom

ania

Rus

sian

Fed

erat

ion

Aus

tria

Mont

eneg

roBr

azil

Irel

and

Ger

man

yH

ong

Kong

-Chi

naAus

tral

iaN

ew Z

eala

ndSe

rbia

Kore

aH

ungar

y

Girls Boys%

26

26

26 A continuum of support

Make learning central, encourage engagement and responsibility

Be acutely sensitive to individual differences

Provide continual assessment with formative feedback

Be demanding for every student

Ensure that students feel valued and included and learning is collaborative

27 27 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money pits

Must haves

Low hanging fruits

Quick wins







Clear ambitious goals that are shared across the system and aligned with high stakes gateways and instructional systems Well established delivery chain through which

curricular goals translate into instructional systems, instructional practices and student learning (intended, implemented and achieved)

High level of metacognitive content of instruction …

28 28 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money pits

Must haves

Low hanging fruits

Quick wins







Capacity at the point of delivery Attracting, developing and retaining high quality

teachers and school leaders and a work organisation in which they can use their potential

Instructional leadership and human resource management in schools

Keeping teaching an attractive profession System-wide career development …

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 29 29 Teachers' perceptions of the value of teaching

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that teaching profession is a valued profession in society

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Mal

aysia

Sing

apore

Kore

a

Abu

Dha

bi (U

AE)

Finl

and

Mex

ico

Alb

erta

(Can

ada)

Flan

der

s (B

elgiu

m)

Net

herlan

ds

Aus

tral

ia

Engla

nd (U

K)

Rom

ania

Isra

el

Uni

ted S

tate

s

Chi

le

Ave

rage

Norw

ay

Japan

Latv

ia

Serb

ia

Bulg

aria

Den

mar

k

Pola

nd

Icel

and

Esto

nia

Braz

il

Ital

y

Cze

ch R

epub

lic

Portug

al

Cro

atia

Spai

n

Swed

en

Fran

ce

Slova

k Rep

ublic

Perc

enta

ge

of tea

cher

s

Above-average performers in PISA

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 30 30

Countries where teachers believe their profession is valued show higher levels of student achievement

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

Australia

Brazil

Bulgaria

Chile

Croatia

Czech Republic

Denmark

Estonia Finland France

Iceland Israel

Italy

Japan

Korea

Latvia

Mexico

Netherlands

Norway

Poland

Portugal

Romania

Serbia

Singapore

Slovak Republic

Spain Sweden

Alberta (Canada)

England (UK)

Flanders (Belgium)

United States

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Shar

e of

mat

hem

atic

s to

p p

erfo

rmer

s

Percentage of teachers who agree that teaching is valued in society

R2 = 0.24 r= 0.49

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100D

iscu

ss ind

ivid

ual

stud

ents

Shar

e re

sour

ces

Team

conf

eren

ces

Colla

bora

te for co

mm

on

stan

dar

ds

Team

tea

chin

g

Colla

bora

tive

PD

Join

t ac

tiviti

es

Cla

ssro

om

obse

rvat

ions

Perc

enta

ge

of

teac

her

s

Average Japan

Professional collaboration

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who report doing the following activities at least once per month

Teacher co-operation 31

Exchange and co-ordination

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 32 32 Drivers of job satisfaction

The more frequently that

teachers report participating

in collaborative practices

with their colleagues,

the higher their level of

self-efficacy.

The same is true

for job satisfaction.

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 33 33 Teachers' needs for professional development

Percentage of lower secondary teachers indicating they have a high level of need for professional development in the following areas

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Knowledge of the curriculum

Knowledge of the subject field(s)

School management and administration

Pedagogical competencies

Developing competencies for future work

Teaching cross-curricular skills

Student evaluation and assessment practice

Student career guidance and counselling

Approaches to individualised learning

Teaching in a multicultural or multilingual setting

Student behaviour and classroom management

New technologies in the workplace

ICT skills for teaching

Teaching students with special needs

Average

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 34 34 Barriers to professional development participation

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that the following elements represent barriers to their participation in professional development activities

0 20 40 60 80 100

Do not have the pre-requisites (e.g., qualifications, experience,seniority)

There is a lack of employer support

Lack of time due to family responsibilities

There is no relevant professional development offered

Professional development is too expensive/unaffordable

There are no incentives for participating in such activities

Professional development conflicts with my work schedule

Japan Average

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 35 35 Impact of professional development

…the professional development in which they have participated has had a positive impact on their teaching. ·

Regardless of the content, over 3/4 of

teachers report that…


Teachers feedback : direct classroom observations

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Bul

garia

Pol

and

Uni

ted

Sta

tes

Rom

ania

Alb

erta

(Can

ada)

Cro

atia

Cze

ch R

epub

lic

Abu

Dha

bi (U

AE)

Flan

ders

(Bel

gium

)

Ser

bia

Slo

vak

Rep

ublic

Japa

n

Isra

el

Ave

rage

Sin

gapo

re

Latv

ia

Bra

zil

Mex

ico

Mal

aysi

a

Sw

eden

Est

onia

Eng

land

(UK)

Nor

way

Finl

and

Por

tuga

l

Den

mar

k

Kor

ea

Chi

le

Italy

Net

herla

nds

Fran

ce

Spa

in

Icel

and

Aus

tralia

Perc

enta

ge o

f tea

cher

s

Principals School Management Other teachers


Teachers feedback : never received

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Icel

and

Finl

and

Swed

en

Flan

der

s (B

elgiu

m)

Fran

ce

Ital

y

Den

mar

k

Net

herlan

ds

Norw

ay

Spai

n

Aus

tral

ia

Cro

atia

Alb

erta

(Can

ada)

Uni

ted S

tate

s

Japan

Portug

al

Ave

rage

Isra

el

Engla

nd (U

K)

Chi

le

Esto

nia

Serb

ia

Cze

ch R

epublic

Slova

k Rep

ublic

Mex

ico

Sing

apore

Bra

zil

Kore

a

Pola

nd

Abu

Dha

bi (U

AE)

Bul

gar

ia

Rom

ania

Latv

ia

Mal

aysia

Per

centa

ge

of

teac

her

s

Analysis of students' test scores Assessment of content knowledge Direct classroom observation

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 38 38 Feedback and change in behavior

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who report a "moderate" or "large" positive change in the following issues after they received feedback on their work

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Con

fiden

ce a

s a

teac

her

Mot

ivat

ion

Job

satis

fact

ion

Kno

wle

dge

and

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

mai

nsu

bjec

t fie

ld(s

)

Teac

hing

pra

ctic

es

Stu

dent

ass

essm

ents

to im

prov

e st

uden

tle

arni

ng

Cla

ssro

om m

anag

emen

t pra

ctic

es

Met

hods

for t

each

ing

stud

ents

with

spe

cial

need

s

Pub

lic re

cogn

ition

Job

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

Rol

e in

sch

ool d

evel

opm

ent i

nitia

tives

Am

ount

of p

rofe

ssio

nal d

evel

opm

ent

Like

lihoo

d of

car

eer a

dvan

cem

ent

Sal

ary

and/

or fi

nanc

ial b

onus

Average Japan

Personal Pedagogical Professional

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 39 39 Consequences of feedback

Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that:

0 20 40 60 80

If a teacher is consistently underperforming, he/she would bedismissed

The best performing teachers in this school receive the greatestrecognition

Teacher appraisal and feedback have little impact upon the wayteachers teach in the classroom

A mentor is appointed to help teachers improve his/her teaching

A development or training plan is established to improve theirwork as a teacher

Japan Average

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 40 40 Teachers and feedback

On average across TALIS countries,

...and only one in 5 receive feedback from three sources.

Just above half of the teachers report receiving feedback on

their teaching from one or two sources

41 41 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money pits

Must haves

Low hanging fruits

Quick wins







Incentives, accountability, knowledge management Aligned incentive structures

For students How gateways affect the strength, direction, clarity and nature of the

incentives operating on students at each stage of their education Degree to which students have incentives to take tough courses and study hard Opportunity costs for staying in school and performing well

For teachers Make innovations in pedagogy and/or organisation Improve their own performance

and the performance of their colleagues Pursue professional development opportunities

that lead to stronger pedagogical practices

A balance between vertical and lateral accountability Effective instruments to manage and share knowledge and spread

innovation – communication within the system and with stakeholders around it

A capable centre with authority and legitimacy to act

42 42 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s

42

42 Align autonomy with accountability

The question is not how many charter schools you have but how you enable every teacher to assume charter-like autonomy

43 43 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s

43

43

Hong Kong-China

Brazil

Uruguay

Albania

Croatia

Latvia

Lithuania

Chinese Taipei

Thailand Bulgaria

Jordan

Macao-China

UAE Argentina

Indonesia

Kazakhstan

Peru

Costa Rica Tunisia

Qatar

Singapore

Colombia

Malaysia

Serbia

Romania

Viet Nam

Shanghai-China

USA

Poland

New Zealand

Greece

UK

Estonia

Finland

Slovak Rep.

Luxembourg

Germany Austria

Czech Rep.

France

Japan

Turkey

Sweden

Hungary Australia

Israel

Canada

Chile

Belgium Netherlands

Spain Denmark

Switzerland

Iceland

Slovenia Portugal

Norway

Korea

Italy

R² = 0.13

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5

Mat

hem

atic

s pe

rfor

man

ce (s

core

poi

nts)

Index of school responsibility for curriculum and assessment (index points)

Countries that grant schools autonomy over curricula and assessments tend to perform better in mathematics

Source: PISA 2012

No standardisedmath policy

Standardised mathpolicy455

460

465

470

475

480

485

Less school autonomy

More school autonomy

Schools with more autonomy perform better than schools with less autonomy in systems with standardised math policies

Score points

School autonomy for curriculum and assessment x system's extent of implementing a standardised math policy (e.g. curriculum and instructional materials)

Fig IV.1.16

Schools with more autonomy perform better than schools with less autonomy in systems with more collaboration

Teachers don't participate inmanagement

Teachers participate inmanagement455

460

465

470

475

480

485

Less school autonomy

More school autonomy

Score points

School autonomy for resource allocation x System's level of teachers participating in school management Across all participating countries and economies

Fig IV.1.17

0 20 40 60 80 100

Written specification of the school's curriculum andeducational goals

Written specification of student-performance standards

Systematic recording of data, including teacher andstudent attendance and graduation rates, test results…

Internal evaluation/self-evaluation

External evaluation

Written feedback from students (e.g. regarding lessons,teachers or resources)

Teacher mentoring

Regular consultation with one or more experts over aperiod of at least six months with the aim of improving…

Implementation of a standardised policy for mathematics

%

Percentage of students in schools whose principal reported that their schools have the following for quality assurance and improvement:

Japan Singapore OECD average

Quality assurance and school improvement Fig IV.4.14 46

47 47 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money pits

Must haves

Low hanging fruits

Quick wins







Investing resources where they can make most of a difference Alignment of resources with key challenges (e.g.

attracting the most talented teachers to the most challenging classrooms)

Effective spending choices that prioritise high quality teachers over smaller classes

Mean mathematics performance, by school location, after accounting for socio-economic status Fig II.3.3 48 48 What teachers do beyond teaching

Average number of 60-minute hours teachers report spending on the following tasks in an average week

Finland Malaysia

Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates) Flanders (Belgium)

Israel Italy Malaysia

Japan Malaysia Sweden

Finland Korea

Finland Malaysia

Finland Korea

Finland Malaysia Portugal Singapore

Croatia Finland Japan

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Number of hours

School management

Communication with parents

All other tasks

Extracurricular activities

Student counselling

Team work

Administrative work

Marking

Planning

Hong Kong-China

Brazil Uruguay

Croatia

Latvia

Chinese Taipei

Thailand Bulgaria

Jordan

Macao-China

UAE Argentina

Indonesia Kazakhstan

Peru

Costa Rica Montenegro

Tunisia

Qatar

Singapore

Colombia

Malaysia Serbia

Romania

Viet Nam

Shanghai-China

USA

Poland

New Zealand

Greece

UK

Estonia

Finland Slovak Rep.

Luxembourg

Germany Austria France

Japan

Turkey Sweden Hungary Australia Israel

Canada Ireland

Chile

Belgium

Spain Denmark

Switzerland

Iceland

Slovenia

Portugal Norway

Mexico

Korea

Italy

R² = 0.19

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

-0.500.511.5

Mat

hem

atic

s pe

rfor

man

ce (s

core

poi

nts)

Equity in resource allocation (index points)

Countries with better performance in mathematics tend to allocate educational resources more equitably

Greater equity

Less equity

Adjusted by per capita GDP

Fig IV.1.11

30% of the variation in math performance across OECD countries is explained by the degree of similarity of

educational resources between advantaged and disadvantaged schools

OECD countries tend to allocate at least an equal, if not a larger, number of teachers per student to disadvantaged schools; but disadvantaged schools tend to have great difficulty in attracting qualified teachers.


Distribution of experienced teachers in more and less challenging schools

Schools with more than 30% of students from socioeconomically disadvantaged homes

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

Bra

zil

Kore

a

Cro

atia

Net

herlan

ds

Uni

ted S

tate

s

Chi

le

Latv

ia

Mex

ico

Portug

al

Ital

y

Serb

ia

Fran

ce

Bul

gar

ia

Abu

Dha

bi (U

AE)

Slova

k Rep

ublic

Pola

nd

Mal

aysia

Spai

n

Ave

rage

Aus

tral

ia

Sing

apore

Esto

nia

Japan

Engla

nd (U

nite

d K

ingdom

)

Isra

el

Rom

ania

Alb

erta

(Can

ada)

Swed

en

Flan

der

s (B

elgiu

m)

Difference in the proportion of teachers with more than 5 years teaching experience who work in more challenging schools and those who do not

Higher proportion of experienced teachers in challenging schools

Higher proportion of experienced teachers in schools that are less

challenging

51 51 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money pits

Must haves

Low hanging fruits

Quick wins







A learning system An outward orientation to keep the system learning,

technology, international benchmarks as the ‘eyes’ and ‘ears’ of the system

Recognising challenges and potential future threats to current success, learning from them, designing responses and implementing these

52 52 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money pits

Must haves

Low hanging fruits

Quick wins







Coherence of policies and practices Alignment of policies

across all aspects of the system Coherence of policies

over sustained periods of time Consistency of implementation Fidelity of implementation

(without excessive control)

53 53 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s




Money pits

Must haves

Low hanging fruits

Quick wins







54 54 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s

Some students learn at high levels All students need to learn at high levels

Student inclusion

Routine cognitive skills, rote learning Learning to learn, complex ways of thinking, ways of working

Curriculum, instruction and assessment

Few years more than secondary High-level professional knowledge workers

Teacher quality

‘Tayloristic’, hierarchical Flat, collegial

Work organisation

Primarily to authorities Primarily to peers and stakeholders

Accountability

What it all means

The old bureaucratic system The modern enabling system

55 55 Le

sson

s fro

m h

igh

perfo

rmer

s

55

55 Thank you

Find out more about our work at www.oecd.org – All publications – The complete micro-level database

Email: [email protected] Twitter: SchleicherEDU

and remember: Without data, you are just another person with an opinion

Documents

How to best shape effective learning and teaching?...organisation's innovation activities face higher skill requirements than non-innovative graduates Source: Avvisati, F., G. Jacotin