Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
GONSKI INSTITUTE FOR EDUCATION - UNSW - Sydneypasi_sahlberg
Evidence from research and international good practice
“EQUITY AND INCLUSION IN SCHOOLS”Valletta, MALTA
11th May 2018
IMPROVING QUALITY AND EQUITY IN EDUCATION
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
EFFECTIVE SCHOOLS:• Strong administrative leadership.• High expectations.• An orderly atmosphere.• Basic skills acquisition as the school’s
primary purpose.• Capacity to divert school energy and
resources to advance the school’sbasic purpose.
• Frequent monitoring of pupilprogress.
A short history of equity in education
P I S
A
“equity in education means that all children are treated equally in school.”
STAND UP IF YOU AGREE THAT…
“Equity in schooling means ensuring that differences in educational outcomes are not
the result of differences in wealth, income, power or possessions.”
- Review of Funding for Schooling (2011)
Equity in education has two dimensions: Equity as inclusion means ensuring that all students reach at least a basic minimum level of skills. Equity as fairness implies that personal or socio-economic circumstances, such as gender, ethnic origin or family background are not obstacles to educational success.
- OECD (2011)
Equity in education is the means to achieving equality. It intends to provide the best opportunities for all students to achieve their full potential and act to address instances of disadvantage which restrict educational achievement.
- UNESCO (2015)
What is equity in education?
FinnishED Leadership (2018)
Resource allocation
Girls vs. Boys
Resilient students
Variability between and within schools
How can equity in education be measured?
Family background vs. Achievement
International data
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Hon
g Ko
ng…
Sing
apor
e
Japa
n
Esto
nia
Chin
ese
Taip
ei
Chin
a
Finl
and
Kore
a
Spai
n
Cana
da
Port
ugal
Uni
ted
King
dom
Latv
ia
Slov
enia
Pola
nd
Ger
man
y
Aus
tral
ia
Uni
ted
Stat
es
Net
herl
ands
New
Zea
land
Irel
and
OEC
D a
vera
ge
Switz
erla
nd
Den
mar
k
Belg
ium
Fran
ce
Ital
y
Nor
way
Aus
tria
Russ
ia
Czec
h Re
publ
ic
Swed
en
Croa
tia
Lith
uani
a
Turk
ey
Mal
ta
Luxe
mbo
urg
Hun
gary
Thai
land
Gre
ece
Slov
ak R
epub
lic
Icel
and
Isra
el
Chile
Uru
guay
Mex
ico
Colo
mbi
a
Indo
nesi
a
Braz
il
Percentage of resilient students
OECD, 2016
Girls vs. boys: Reading performance
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
Finl
and
526
Slov
enia
50
5Ic
elan
d 4
82Ko
rea
517
Norw
ay
513
Swed
en
500
Lithu
ania
47
2Gr
eece
46
7Sl
ovak
Rep
ublic
45
3Ne
w Z
eala
nd
509
Aust
ralia
50
3M
alay
sia
431
Thai
land
40
9Po
land
50
6Fr
ance
49
9Ho
ng K
ong
(Chi
na)
527
Esto
nia
519
Turk
ey
428
OEC
D av
erag
e 4
93Cr
oatia
48
7Ca
nada
52
7Ru
ssia
49
5Cz
ech
Repu
blic
487
Switz
erla
nd
492
Chin
ese
Taip
ei
497
Hung
ary
470
Neth
erla
nds
503
Indo
nesia
39
7Ur
ugua
y 4
37Br
azil
407
Israe
l 4
79De
nmar
k 5
00Un
ited
King
dom
49
8Lu
xem
bour
g 4
81Ge
rman
y 5
09Sp
ain
496
Sing
apor
e 5
35Au
stria
48
5Un
ited
Stat
es
497
Port
ugal
49
8B-
S-J-G
(Chi
na)
494
Italy
48
5Be
lgiu
m
499
Mex
ico
423
Colo
mbi
a 4
25Ja
pan
516
Irela
nd
521
Chile
45
9
Scor
e po
int d
iffer
ence
OECD, 2016
USA
Poland
New Zealand
Greece
UK
Estonia
Finland
Slovak Rep.
Luxembourg
Germany
Austria
Czech Rep.
France
Japan
Turkey
Sweden
Hungary
Australia
Israel
Canada
Ireland
Chile
Belgium
Netherlands
Spain
Denmark
Switzerland
IcelandSlovenia
Portugal
Norway
Mexico
Korea
Italy
R² = 0,33
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
-0,500,511,5
Mat
hem
atic
s p
erfo
rman
ce (
sco
re p
oin
ts)
Equity in resource allocation(index-point difference)Eq
uity
in re
sour
ce a
lloca
tion
refe
rs to
the
diff
eren
ce in
the
inde
x of
qu
ality
of s
choo
ls' e
duca
tiona
l res
ourc
es b
etw
een
soci
o-ec
onom
ical
ly a
dvan
tage
d an
d di
sadv
anta
ged
scho
ol.
Allocation of educational resources vs. mathematics performanceBefore accounting for per capita GDP
OECD, 2013
110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Iceland 93Finland 103Norway 103
Spain 86Ireland 88
Latvia 75Denmark 91
Poland 92Canada 95
Russia 76Estonia 88
Macao (China) 74Mexico 57
Sweden 117United States 108
New Zealand 121Indonesia 52
Dominican Republic 59Portugal 94
Hong Kong (China) 72Thailand 69
Colombia 72United Kingdom 111
Australia 117Korea 101
OECD average 100Lithuania 92
Chile 83Greece 94Croatia 89
Brazil 89Turkey 70
Luxembourg 112Chinese Taipei 111
Italy 93Singapore 120
Switzerland 110Japan 97
Czech Republic 101Israel 126
Austria 106United Arab Emirates 110
Malta 154Slovak Republic 109
Germany 110Slovenia 101Belgium 112
Hungary 104B-S-J-G (China) 119
Netherlands 114Within-school variation Between-school variation
90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10
Varia
tion
in sc
ienc
e pe
rfor
man
ce
with
in a
nd b
etw
een
scho
ols
OECD, 2016
• Singapore
OECD, 2016Weakness of the relationship between student achievement and family background (ESCS Index)
Stud
ent a
chie
vem
ent i
n re
adin
g, m
athe
mat
ics
and
scie
nce
(PIS
A)
EQUITY OF OUTCOMES
• China
STU
DEN
T A
CHIE
VEM
ENT • Hong Kong
Equity vs. quality of educational outcomes
What have we learned?
“The highest-performing education systems across the OECD countries are those that combine quality with equity.”
OECD, 2011
Adopt and implement “positive discrimination” policies.
1
Limit standardized assessments to absolute necessary minimum.
2
3Respond pro-actively to special
educational needs in every school.
4Offer all students different ways
to succeed in school.
5Don’t ask: “How good is Johnny?”Ask: “How is Johnny good?”
Conclusion
“We can, whenever and wherever we choose, successfully teach all children whose schooling is of interest to us.”
STAND UP IF YOU AGREE THAT…
“We can, whenever and wherever we choose, successfully teach all children whose schooling is of interest to us. We already know more than we need to do that. Whether or not we do it must finally depend on how we feel about the fact that we haven’t so far.”
-Ron Edmonds in 1979
pasi_sahlberg
Thank you!