OECD Strategic Education Governance A perspective for Scotland - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

OECD Strategic Education Governance A perspective for Scotland

Claire Shewbridge 25 October 2017 Edinburgh

CERI overview

What CERI does  Generate forward-looking research analyses and syntheses  Identify and stimulate educational innovation  Promote international exchange of knowledge and experience

• OECD CERI Strategic Education Governance

– Fed into the consultation document for proposed reform in Scotland

• Empowering teachers, parents and communities to achieve:

Excellence and equity in education, pp 4-5

• A few key findings from an OECD review of the Scottish school

system in 2015

• Further insights from PISA 2015 results (released December 2016)
• Some considerations for a successful reform

– The need to balance autonomy with a constructive accountability mechanism – Not an easy task! A challenge shared among OECD systems – Promoting more strategic education governance

This presentation….

OECD CERI - Strategic education governance

Based on five key elements of effective governance in complex systems

• Get governance processes right
• Build in flexibility and adapt to unexpected events
• Involve stakeholders in open dialogue
• Look at the system as a whole
• Harness evidence and research effectively for policy reform

Meeting challenges of how to…  Encourage strategic thinking  Design accountability mechanisms  Build capacity for policy making and implementation

• Mixed evidence on overall quality of

Scottish schooling – Scottish students performing above the OECD average in science and reading and at the average in mathematics (PISA 2012) – But some declining achievement levels on international data … and also on Scottish data – Positive attitudes reported by Scottish teenagers (PISA 2012)

• Positive points for equity

– Scottish schools are inclusive – Migrant students do well – But national data show persistent gaps between students in least and most deprived areas

OECD review in 2015

6

Significant drop in average performance of Scottish students in the PISA mathematics test

Between 2003 and 2012 when mathematics was the main part of the PISA test

Negative trend confirmed in PISA 2015 Science performance

Singapore Japan Estonia Chinese Taipei Finland Macao (China) Canada Viet Nam Hong Kong (China) B-S-J-G (China) Korea New Zealand Slovenia Australia

UK

Germany Netherlands Ireland Belgium Denmark Poland Portugal Norway United States Austria France Sweden Czech Republic Spain Latvia Russia Luxembourg Italy Hungary Lithuania Croatia CABA (Argentina) Iceland Israel Malta Slovak Republic Greece Chile Bulgaria United Arab Emirates Romania Uruguay Moldova Albania Turkey Trinidad and Tobago Thailand Costa Rica Qatar Colombia Mexico Georgia Montenegro Jordan

410 430 450 470 490 510 530 550 Mean score PISA 2015 SCIENCE

10 countries perform below this line…

Figure I.2.14

Scotland

• Scottish students performed

at the OECD average in PISA 2015

• In earlier PISA surveys, their

performance was above average (515 in 2006)

• A lower proportion of

students performing well on the most challenging PISA science tasks

Scottish students losing ground at the top

Percentage of top performers in science (PISA 2015)

Table I.2.2a

5 10 15 20 25

Singapore Chinese Taipei Japan Finland B-S-J-G (China) Estonia New Zealand Canada Australia Netherlands United Kingdom Korea Slovenia Germany Switzerland Macao (China) Belgium United States Sweden Viet Nam France Norway OECD average Austria Malta Scotland Portugal Hong Kong (China) Poland Czech Republic Ireland Denmark Luxembourg Israel Spain Hungary Lithuania Italy Croatia Latvia Iceland Russia Slovak Republic Bulgaria United Arab Emirates CABA (Argentina) Greece Qatar Trinidad and Tobago Uruguay Chile Georgia Moldova Romania Brazil Montenegro Thailand Lebanon Albania Colombia Turkey FYROM Jordan Costa Rica Peru Mexico Indonesia Tunisia Algeria Dominican Republic Kosovo

%

There was a higher than average proportion of top performers in the PISA 2006 science test 12.5% Scotland; 9.0% OECD average

Percentage of lowest performers in science (PISA 2015)

Table I.2.2a

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Viet Nam Macao (China) Estonia Hong Kong (China) Singapore Japan Canada Finland Chinese Taipei Korea Slovenia Ireland Denmark B-S-J-G (China) Poland Germany Latvia Portugal United Kingdom New Zealand Australia Russia Spain Switzerland Netherlands Norway Scotland Belgium United States Czech Republic Austria OECD average Sweden France CABA (Argentina) Italy Croatia Lithuania Iceland Luxembourg Hungary Slovak Republic Israel Malta Greece Chile Bulgaria Romania Uruguay Albania United Arab Emirates Moldova Turkey Trinidad and Tobago Costa Rica Thailand Mexico Colombia Jordan Qatar Georgia Montenegro Indonesia Brazil Peru Lebanon FYROM Tunisia Kosovo Algeria Dominican Republic

%

Lowest performers in PISA 2006 science test 19.3% OECD average 14.6% Scotland

Disadvantaged Scottish students fare relatively better in basic science proficiency

Odds ratio that disadvantaged students do NOT attain the baseline level of proficiency in science (PISA 2015)

Figure I.6.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Dominican Republic CABA (Argentina) Peru Singapore France Hungary B-S-J-G (China) Luxembourg Chile Bulgaria Belgium Czech Republic Slovak Republic Germany Switzerland Chinese Taipei New Zealand Spain Austria Japan Portugal Poland Australia Israel Uruguay OECD average Malta Ireland Greece Jordan Lebanon Romania Slovenia Costa Rica Italy Mexico Finland Georgia Netherlands Sweden Brazil Moldova Lithuania Canada Qatar United States Denmark Colombia Indonesia Korea Norway Tunisia United Arab Emirates United Kingdom Scotland Russia Croatia Trinidad and Tobago FYROM Viet Nam Turkey Estonia Hong Kong (China) Latvia Montenegro Kosovo Iceland Thailand Macao (China) Algeria

Odds ratio

Relative performance of immigrant students in science

Similar to other students in Scotland and stronger than counterparts in many other systems (PISA 2015)

Figure I.7.4

350 400 450 500 550 600

Greece Costa Rica Jordan CABA (Argentina) Israel Sweden France Slovenia Austria Germany Netherlands Denmark Italy Norway Belgium OECD average Spain Croatia United States Luxembourg Switzerland Qatar Portugal Russia United Arab Emirates United Kingdom Scotland Ireland Australia Estonia Hong Kong (China) New Zealand Canada Macao (China) Singapore Score points Non-immigrant students

Second-generation immigrant students First-generation immigrant students

Scottish students report strong approach to acquiring scientific knowledge

Students' epistemic beliefs (PISA 2015)

70 75 80 85 90 95

A good way to know if something is true is to do an experiment Ideas in <broad science> sometimes change Good answers are based

• n evidence from many

different experiments It is good to try experiments more than once to make sure

• f your findings

Sometimes <broad science> scientists change their minds about what is true in science The ideas in <broad science> science books sometimes change

Percentage of students who agreed with the following statements

Scotland United Kingdom OECD average Figure I.2.32

• PISA survey cycles have allowed insight to the greater number of

actors involved in decision making – Well established trend to greater responsibility at the school level – But starting to reverse between 2009 and 2015

• Fewer principals reported having considerable responsibility
• ver budget, hiring teachers or courses offered at school
• PISA 2015 highlighted the interplay between autonomy and

accountability – Science performance better when principals report greater autonomy over resources, curriculum and other school policies – But especially in countries where

• achievement data are tracked over time or posted publicly
• principals report higher levels of educational leadership
• OECD Governance in Complex Education Systems case studies

revealed challenges in striking this balance in all systems

Complex systems: many actors involved and the need for a constructive accountability system

System Focus of the case study Implementation lessons Flanders (Belgium) Attainment targets & stakeholder participation Overall context of multi-level governance Germany Building local capacity & promoting use of data Local factors that influence the relative effectiveness Poland Implementation of new school supervision system Logistical & structural issues; building trust in evaluation for improvement Sweden Devolution of decision making to municipal authorities Lack of local capacity building & system vision Netherlands Improving the performance of weak primary schools Dynamics of implementation; role of the media and parents Norway Implementation of formative student assessment programme Dynamics of change and capacity building for teachers when going large scale

Complex systems: stakeholder involvement, capacity building and constructive accountability

A framework for strategic education governance

Stakeholder focus Whole-of-system perspective Strategic thinking Capacity Accountability Enabling local discretion while limiting fragmentation Promoting a culture of learning and improvement Ensuring capacity for policy- making and implementation Stimulating horizontal capacity building Crafting, sharing and consolidating a system vision Adapting to changing contexts and new knowledge Balancing urgencies/ short-term priorities with the long term system vision Developing synergies within the system and moderating tensions Overcoming system inertia Integrating stakeholder knowledge and perspectives Fostering support, shared responsibility, ownership and trust Knowledge governance Collecting quality and rich data for research and decision- making Facilitating access to data and knowledge Promoting a culture of using rich data and knowledge

Thank you! www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/strategic-education-governance claire.shewbridge@oecd.org