benchmarking international best practice

78
1 1 Putting the World into World-Class Education Washington, July 10, 2009 Benchmarking international best practice Benchmarking international best practice Putting the World into World-Class Education Asia Society, Washington, July 10, 2009 Prof. Andreas Schleicher Head, Indicators and Analysis Division OECD Directorate for Education

Upload: asia-society-education-programs

Post on 13-Jan-2015

5.592 views

Category:

Technology


8 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Benchmarking International Best Practice

11P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Benchmarking international best practice

Putting the World into World-Class EducationAsia Society, Washington, July 10, 2009

Prof. Andreas SchleicherHead, Indicators and Analysis Division

OECD Directorate for Education

Page 2: Benchmarking International Best Practice

22P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

There is nowhere to hideThe yardstick for success is no longer improvement by national

standards but the best performing education systems

Page 3: Benchmarking International Best Practice

AustraliaAustriaCzech RepublicDenmarkFinlandGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandItalyJapanNetherlandsNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSpainSwedenUnited KingdomUnited States

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

Graduate supply

Cost

per

stu

den

t

Page 4: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

United States

Finland

Graduate supply

Cost

per

stu

den

t

Page 5: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

Australia

United States (2000)

Finland

Page 6: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

Page 7: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

Page 8: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

Page 9: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

Page 10: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

United States

Australia

Finland

Israel 5th in university attainment in the

younger generation (but down from 2nd in the older generation)

Page 11: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

United States

Page 12: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

United States

Page 13: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

United States

Page 14: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

United States

Page 15: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

United States

Page 16: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

Page 17: Benchmarking International Best Practice

Expe

nditu

re p

er s

tude

nt a

t ter

tiary

leve

l (U

SD)

Tertiary-type A graduation rate

A world of change – college education

United States

Rising higher education qualifications seem generally not to have led to an “inflation” of the labour-market value of qualifications.

In all but three of the 20 countries with available data, the earnings benefit increased between 1997 and 2003, in Germany, Italy and Hungary by between 20% and 40%

Page 18: Benchmarking International Best Practice

1919P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eMoving targets

Future supply of high school graduates

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

China EU India US

2003

2010

2015

Page 19: Benchmarking International Best Practice

2020P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

4,000,000

4,500,000

5,000,000

China EU India US

2003

2010

2015

Future supply of high school graduates

0

2 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0

4 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0

6 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0

8 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0

10 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0

12 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0

14 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0

China EU India US

2003

2010

2015

Future supply of college graduates

Page 20: Benchmarking International Best Practice

2121P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Schooling in the medieval age:

The school of the church

Page 21: Benchmarking International Best Practice

2222P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Schooling in the industrial age:

Educating for discipline

Page 22: Benchmarking International Best Practice

2323P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Schooling in the industrial age:

Educating for discipline

The challenges today:

Motivated and self-reliant citizens

Risk-taking entrepreneurs, converging and continuously emerging professions tied to globalising contexts and technological advance

Page 23: Benchmarking International Best Practice

2424P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eHow the demand for skills has changed

Economy-wide measures of routine and non-routine task input (US)

1960 1970 1980 1990 200240

45

50

55

60

65 Routine manual

Nonroutine manual

Routine cognitive

Nonroutine analytic

Nonroutine inter-active

(Levy and Murnane)

Mean t

ask

inp

ut

as

perc

en

tile

s of

the 1

960

task

dis

trib

uti

on

The dilemma of schools:The skills that are easiest to teach and test are also the ones that are easiest to digitise, automate and outsource

Page 24: Benchmarking International Best Practice

2525P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Deciding what to assess...

looking back at what students were expected to have learned

…or…looking ahead to how well they can extrapolate from what they have

learned and apply their knowledge and skills in novel settings.

For the PISA assessment of the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds, OECD governments chose the latter

Page 25: Benchmarking International Best Practice

2626P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eMathematics in PISA

The real world The mathematical World

A real situation

A model of reality A mathematical model

Mathematical results

Real results

Understanding, structuring and simplifying the situation

Making the problem amenable to mathematical

treatment

Interpreting the mathematical results

Using relevant mathematical tools to solve the problemValidating

the results

Page 26: Benchmarking International Best Practice

2727P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Coverage of world economy 77%81%83%85%86%87%

OECD’s PISA assessment of the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds

Page 27: Benchmarking International Best Practice

2828P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eAverage performanceof 15-year-olds in science – extrapolate and apply

High science performance

Low science performance

… 18 countries perform below this line

I srael

I talyPortugal Greece

Russian Federation

LuxembourgSlovak Republic,Spain,Iceland Latvia

Croatia

Sweden

DenmarkFrancePoland

Hungary

AustriaBelgiumIreland

Czech Republic SwitzerlandMacao- ChinaGermanyUnited Kingdom

Korea

J apanAustralia

Slovenia

NetherlandsLiechtenstein

New ZealandChinese Taipei

Hong Kong- China

Finland

CanadaEstonia

United States LithuaniaNorway

445

465

485

505

525

545

565

616

Page 28: Benchmarking International Best Practice

2929P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eIncreased likelihood of postsec. particip. at age 19 associated with reading proficiency at age

15 (Canada)after accounting for school engagement, gender, mother

tongue, place of residence, parental, education and family income (reference group Level 1)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

Page 29: Benchmarking International Best Practice

3030P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

0

10

20

30

40

1989

1994

1999

2004

2014

2019

2024

2029

2034

2039

2044

2049

2054

2059

2064

The cost of inactionImproved GDP from achieving the goal of being first in the world by 2000

Note: *K-12 education expenitures are assumed to be constant at the level attained in 2005. These data show that economic benefits from a 1989 reform that raised the U.S. to the highest levels of test performance would cover the cost of K-12 education by 2015

Source:Eric Hanushek

Percent addition to GDP

10-year reform20-year reform30-year reformTotal U.S. K-12 spending

Page 30: Benchmarking International Best Practice

3131P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e The international achievement gap is imposing

on the US economy an invisible yet recurring economic loss that is greater than the output shortfall in what has been called the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression

If the United States had in recent years closed the gap to better-performing nations such as Finland and Korea, GDP in 2008 could have been $1.3 trillion to $2.3 trillion higher (equivalent to 9 – 16% of GDP)

If the gap between black and Latino student performance and white student performance had been similarly narrowed, GDP in 2008 would have been between$310 billion and $525 billion higher– The magnitude of this impact will rise in the years

ahead as demographic shifts result in blacks and Latinos becoming a larger proportion of the population and workforce.

Page 31: Benchmarking International Best Practice

3737P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eAverage performanceof 15-year-olds in science – extrapolate and apply

Low average performance

Large socio-economic disparities

High average performance

Large socio-economic disparities

Low average performance

High social equity

High average performance

High social equity

Strong socio-economic impact on

student performance

Socially equitable distribution of

learning opportunities

High science performance

Low science performance

I srael

I talyPortugal Greece

Russian Federation

LuxembourgSlovak Republic,Spain,Iceland Latvia

Croatia

Sweden

DenmarkFrancePoland

Hungary

AustriaBelgiumIreland

Czech Republic SwitzerlandMacao- ChinaGermanyUnited Kingdom

Korea

J apanAustralia

Slovenia

NetherlandsLiechtenstein

New ZealandChinese Taipei

Hong Kong- China

Finland

CanadaEstonia

United States LithuaniaNorway

445

465

485

505

525

545

565

616

Page 32: Benchmarking International Best Practice

3838P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eDurchschnittliche Schülerleistungen im Bereich Mathematik

Low average performance

Large socio-economic disparities

High average performance

Large socio-economic disparities

Low average performance

High social equity

High average performance

High social equity

Strong socio-economic impact on

student performance

Socially equitable distribution of

learning opportunities

High science performance

Low science performance

I srael

GreecePortugal I talyRussian Federation

LuxembourgSlovak Republic SpainIcelandLatvia

Croatia

Sweden

DenmarkFrancePoland

Hungary

AustriaBelgiumIreland

Czech Republic Switzerland Macao- China

Germany United Kingdom

Korea

J apanAustralia

SloveniaNetherlands

Liechtenstein

New ZealandChinese Taipei

Hong Kong- China

Finland

CanadaEstonai

United StatesLithuania Norway

440

460

480

500

520

540

560

2122215

Page 33: Benchmarking International Best Practice

4343P

ISA

OE

CD

Pro

gram

me

for

Inte

rnat

iona

l Stu

dent

Ass

essm

ent

Brie

fing

of C

ounc

il

14 N

ovem

ber

2007

How to get thereSome policy levers that emerge from

international comparisons

Page 34: Benchmarking International Best Practice

4444P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eMoney matters - but other things do too

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000400

425

450

475

500

525

550

575

495

410

488

f(x) = 0.000612701270434404 x + 462.612736410929R² = 0.190354458948511

Scienceperformance

Cumulative expenditure (US$ converted using PPPs)

Page 35: Benchmarking International Best Practice

4545P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Port

ug

al

Sp

ain

Sw

itze

rlan

d

Tu

rkey

Belg

ium

Kore

a

Lu

xem

bou

rg

Germ

an

y

Gre

ece

Jap

an

Au

stra

lia

Un

ited

Kin

gd

om

New

Zeala

nd

Fra

nce

Neth

erl

an

ds

Den

mark

Italy

Au

stri

a

Cze

ch

Rep

ub

lic

Hu

ng

ary

Norw

ay

Icela

nd

Irela

nd

Mexic

o

Fin

lan

d

Sw

ed

en

Un

ited

Sta

tes

Pola

nd

Slo

vak R

ep

ub

lic

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

Salary as % of GDP/capita Instruction time 1/teaching time 1/class sizePort

ug

al

Sp

ain

Sw

itze

rlan

d

Tu

rkey

Belg

ium

Kore

a

Lu

xem

bou

rg

Germ

an

y

Gre

ece

Jap

an

Au

stra

lia

Un

ited

Kin

gd

om

New

Zeala

nd

Fra

nce

Neth

erl

an

ds

Den

mark

Italy

Au

stri

a

Cze

ch

Rep

ub

lic

Hu

ng

ary

Norw

ay

Icela

nd

Irela

nd

Mexic

o

Fin

lan

d

Sw

ed

en

Un

ited

Sta

tes

Pola

nd

Slo

vak R

ep

ub

lic

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

Difference with OECD average

Spending choices on secondary schoolsContribution of various factors to upper secondary teacher compensation costs

per student as a percentage of GDP per capita (2004)

Percentage points

Page 36: Benchmarking International Best Practice

4646P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

High ambitions and universal

standards

Rigor, focus and coherence

Great systems attract great teachers and

provide access to best practice and quality

professional development

Page 37: Benchmarking International Best Practice

4747P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eChallenge and support

Weak support

Strong support

Lowchallenge

Highchallenge

Strong performance

Systemic improvement

Poor performance

Improvements idiosyncratic

Conflict

Demoralisation

Poor performance

Stagnation

Page 38: Benchmarking International Best Practice

4848P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Human capital

International Best Practice• Principals who are trained,

empowered, accountable and provide instructional leadership

• Attracting, recruiting and providing excellent training for prospective teachers from the top third of the graduate distribution

• Incentives, rules and funding encourage a fair distribution of teaching talent

The past

• Principals who manage ‘a building’, who have little training and preparation and are accountable but not empowered

• Attracting and recruiting teachers from the bottom third of the graduate distribution and offering training which does not relate to real classrooms• The best teachers are in the most advantaged communities

Page 39: Benchmarking International Best Practice

4949P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Human capital (cont…)

International Best Practice• Expectations of teachers are

clear; consistent quality, strong professional ethic and excellent professional development focused on classroom practice

• Teachers and the system expect every child to succeed and intervene preventatively to ensure this

The past

• Seniority and tenure matter more than performance; patchy professional development; wide variation in quality

• Wide achievement gaps, just beginning to narrow but systemic and professional barriers to transformation remain in place

Page 40: Benchmarking International Best Practice

5151P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

ePerception of teachers of the impact of appraisal and

feedback in their school

Mal

aysia

Bulga

ria

Polan

dItal

y

Slova

k Rep

ublic

Hunga

ry

Mex

ico

Slove

nia

Turk

ey

Lith

uani

a

TALI

S Ave

rage

Esto

nia

Brazil

Portu

gal

Icel

and

Mal

ta

Austr

ia

Korea

Spain

Denm

ark

Austr

alia

Irel

and

Norway

Belgi

um (F

l.)80

60

40

20

0

20

40

60

80

Teachers who would receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards if they improve the quality of their teaching

Teachers who would receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards if they are more innovative in their teaching

%

Countries are ranked in descending order of percentage of teachers reporting to receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards for an improvement in the quality of their teaching. Source: OECD. Table 5.9.

Figure 5.7

Page 41: Benchmarking International Best Practice

5252P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

High ambitions

Access to best practice and quality professional development

Accountability and intervention in

inverse proportion to success

Devolved responsibility,

the school as the centre of action

Page 42: Benchmarking International Best Practice

5353P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

No

Yes

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

No

Yes

0

41

46

63

Standards based external

examinations School autonomyin selecting teachers for hire

PISA score in science

School autonomy, standards-based examinations and science performance

School autonomy in selecting teachers for hire

Page 43: Benchmarking International Best Practice

5454P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eLocal responsibility and national

prescription

National prescription

Schools leading reform

Schools todayThe industrial

model, detailed prescription of

what schools do

Schools tomorrow?

Building capacity

Finland todayEvery school an effective school

Towards system-wide sustainable reform

Page 44: Benchmarking International Best Practice

5555P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

ePublic and private schools

0 20 40 60 80 100

Luxembourg

J apan

I taly

Switzerland

Finland

Denmark

Czech Republic

Sweden

Hungary

Austria

Portugal

United States

Netherlands

Slovak Republic

Korea

I reland

Spain

Canada

Mexico

New Zealand

Germany

OECD

United Kingdom

Government schools

Government dependent private

Government independent private

- 150 - 100 - 50 0 50 100

Observed perf ormance diff erence

Diff erence af ter accounting f or socio-economic background of students and schools

Private schools perform better

Public schools perform better

%Score point difference

Page 45: Benchmarking International Best Practice

5656P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

ePooled international dataset, effects of selected

school/system factors on science performance after accounting for all other factors in the model

OECD (2007), PISA 2006 – Science Competencies from Tomorrow’s World, Table 6.1a

Gross Net30

20

10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Approx. one school year

Sco

re p

oin

t d

iffe

ren

ce in

sci

en

ce

Schools practicing ability grouping (gross and net)

Academically selective schools (gross and net)

but no system-wide effect

School results posted publicly (gross and net)

One additional hour of science learning at

school (gross and net)

One additional hour of out-of-school lessons

(gross and net)

One additional hour of self-study or homework

(gross and net)

School activities to promote science

learning(gross and net)

Schools with greater autonomy (resources)

(gross and net)

Each additional 10% of public funding(gross only)

Schools with more competing schools

(gross only)

School principal’s perception that lack of

qualified teachers hinders instruction

(gross only)

School principal’s positive evaluation of quality of educational

materials(gross only)

Measured effect

Effect after accounting for the socio-economic

background of students, schools and countries

Page 46: Benchmarking International Best Practice

5757P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Strong ambitions

Access to best practice and quality professional development

Accountability

Devolvedresponsibility,

the school as the centre of action

Integrated educational

opportunities

From prescribed forms of teaching and assessment towards personalised learning

Page 47: Benchmarking International Best Practice

5858P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eDurchschnittliche Schülerleistungen im Bereich Mathematik

Low average performance

Large socio-economic disparities

High average performance

Large socio-economic disparities

Low average performance

High social equity

High average performance

High social equity

Strong socio-economic impact on

student performance

Socially equitable distribution of

learning opportunities

High science performance

Low science performanceTurkey

AustraliaJ apan

Finland

CanadaNew Zealand

Korea

Czech Republic United KingdomAustria

Germany

Netherlands

SwitzerlandI relandBelgium

PolandSwedenHungary

IcelandFrance Denmark

United States SpainLuxembourg NorwaySlovak Republic

I talyGreecePortugal

420

440

460

480

500

520

540

560

580

21222

Early selection and institutional differentiation

High degree of stratification

Low degree of stratification

6

Page 48: Benchmarking International Best Practice

5959P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eParadigm shifts

Prescription Informed profession

Uniformity Embracing diversity

Demarcation Collaboration

Provision Outcomes

Bureaucratic – look up Devolved – look outwards

Talk equity Deliver equity

Hit & miss Universal high standards

Received wisdom Data and best practice

The old bureaucratic education system The modern enabling education system

Page 49: Benchmarking International Best Practice

6060P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Creating a knowledge-rich profession in which schools and teachers have the authority to act, the necessary

knowledge to do so wisely, and access to effective support systems

The tradition of education systems

has been “knowledge poor”

The future of education systems is “knowledge

rich”

National prescription

Professional judgement

Informed professional judgement, the teacher

as a “knowledge worker”

Informed prescription

Uninformed professional judgement, teachers working in isolation

Uninformed prescription,

teachers implement curricula

Page 50: Benchmarking International Best Practice

6161P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Thank you !

www.oecd.org; www.pisa.oecd.org– All national and international publications– The complete micro-level database

email: [email protected]

[email protected]

…and remember:

Without data, you are just another person with an opinion

Page 51: Benchmarking International Best Practice

6262P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

TALIS AverageTurkey

SpainSlovenia

Slovak RepublicPortugal

PolandNorwayMexicoMalta

MalaysiaLithuania

KoreaItaly

IrelandIceland

HungaryEstonia

DenmarkBulgaria

BrazilBelgium (Fl.)

AustriaAustralia

010

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Making a significant educational difference

010

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Successful with students in their class

Making progress with students

Do teachers trust in their own effectiveness?

Light green bars represent teachers

who agree

Dark green bars represent teachers who strongly agree

23%

76%

19%

69%

61%

22%

Page 52: Benchmarking International Best Practice

6363P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eHow much time is actually used for learning?

Bulgar

ia

Esto

nia

Hungar

y

Slova

k Rep

ublic

Lith

uania

Slove

nia

Polan

d

Irel

and

Den

mar

k

Nor

way

Austria

TALI

S Ave

rage

Turk

ey

Belgiu

m (Fl

.)

Korea

Mal

taItal

y

Spain

Austra

lia

Portu

gal

Icel

and

Mal

aysia

Mex

ico

Brazil

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Keeping order in the classroom Administrative tasks

Time actually used for teaching and learning

Figure 4.9Source: OECD, TALIS Database.

8%13%

Page 53: Benchmarking International Best Practice

6464P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Au

str

ali

a

Au

str

ia

Belg

ium

(Fl.

)

Bra

zil

Bu

lgari

a

Den

mark

Esto

nia

Hu

ng

ary

Icela

nd

Irela

nd

Italy

Kore

a

Lit

hu

an

ia

Mala

ysia

Malt

a

Mexic

o

Norw

ay

Pola

nd

Port

ug

al

Slo

vak R

ep

ub

lic

Slo

ven

ia

Sp

ain

Tu

rkey

TA

LIS

Avera

ge

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

50th-75th percentile 25th-50th percentile 5th-25th percentile 0-5th percentile%

Some teachers lose much more time than others

Percentiles of time on spent on task

Figure

4.10

Source: OECD, TALIS Database.

Page 54: Benchmarking International Best Practice

6565P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Professional development Countries are investing significantly in

teachers’ professional development but there appear to be real issues about matching demand and supply, cost and benefit.

There is a lack of suitable development activities on offer to satisfy teachers’ demand and it is notable that those teachers who take part in more days of development are more likely to have to contribute towards the cost themselves

Page 55: Benchmarking International Best Practice

6666P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eComparison of the level and intensity of

participation in professional development

70 75 80 85 90 95 1000

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

AustraliaAustria

Brazil

Bulgaria

DenmarkEstonia

Hungary

Iceland

Ireland

ItalyKorea

LithuaniaMalaysia

Malta

Mexico

Norway

Poland

Portugal

Slovak Republic Slovenia

Spain

Turkey

Source: OECD. Table 3.1 Figure 3.2

Percentage of teachers undertaking professional development

Avera

ge d

ays o

f p

rofe

ssio

nal d

evelo

pm

en

t u

nd

ert

aken

Page 56: Benchmarking International Best Practice

6767P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Impact

Part

icip

ati

on

Impact

Part

icip

ati

on

Impact

Part

icip

ati

on

Impact

Part

icip

ati

on

Impact

Part

icip

ati

on

Impact

Part

icip

ati

on

Impact

Part

icip

ati

on

Impact

Part

icip

ati

on

Impact

Part

icip

ati

on

Individ-ual and collabo-rative

research

Qualifi-cation pro-

grammes

Informal dialogue to im-prove

teaching

Reading profes-sional litera-ture

Courses and

work-shops

Profes-sional devel-

opment network

Mentor-ing and

peer obser-vation

Obser-vation

visits to other

schools

Educa-tion con-ferences and sem-

inars

0102030405060708090

100

%

Fuente: OCDE. Tablas 3.2 y 3.8

Figure

3.15

Impacto?

AverageAustria

Relatively few teachers participate in the kinds of professional development which they find has the largest impact on their work

Comparison of teachers participating in professional development activities and teachers reporting

moderate or high level impact by types of activity

Page 57: Benchmarking International Best Practice

6868P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Figure

3.15

Relatively few teachers participate in the kinds of professional development which they find has the largest impact on their work

Comparison of teachers participating in professional development activities and teachers reporting

moderate or high level impact by types of activity

Page 58: Benchmarking International Best Practice

7070P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Bu

lgari

a

Mexic

o

Italy

Pola

nd

Kore

a

Norw

ay

Port

ug

al

Sp

ain

TA

LIS

Ave..

.

Icela

nd

Bra

zil

Esto

nia

Hu

ng

ary

Belg

ium

(Fl.

)

Den

mark

Slo

ven

ia

Malt

a

Tu

rkey

Slo

vak R

ep

...

Irela

nd

Au

str

ali

a

Au

str

ia

Mala

ysia

Lit

hu

an

ia

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Paid no cost Paid some cost Paid all cost

Countries are ranked in descending order of percentage of teachers having paid all of the cost of development they tookSource: OECD. Table 3.5a

Days of development

The teachers who paid most also did most professional development

Figure

3.10

Page 59: Benchmarking International Best Practice

7171P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Teaching special learning needs

students

ICT teach-ing skills

Student discipline

and behav-iour prob-

lems

Instruc-tional prac-

tices

Subject field

Student counselling

Content and per-formance

standards

Student assessment

practices

Teaching in a multicul-tural set-

ting

Classroom manage-

ment

School manage-ment and

administra-tion

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Areas are ranked in descending order of the international average where teachers report a high level of need for development. Source: OECD. Table 3.2

%

Figure 3.6

It’s not just about more of the sameFor what type of professional development

do teachers report a high level of need?

Page 60: Benchmarking International Best Practice

7676P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Teacher appraisal and feedback

Teachers generally respond positively to appraisal and feedback but such practices are not widespread

Connection between school evaluation and teacher appraisal/feedback can be effective in influencing teaching practices

Three-quarters reported that they would receive no recognition for improving the quality of their work or for being more innovative in their teaching

Page 61: Benchmarking International Best Practice

7777P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eDoes appraisal and feedback

make a difference for teaching?

Figure 5.6

Mala

ysia

Mexic

o

Bu

lga

ria

Bra

zil

Pola

nd

Slo

ven

ia

Lit

hu

an

ia

Italy

Tu

rke

y

TA

LIS

Avera

ge

Slo

vak R

ep

ub

lic

Kore

a

Port

ug

al

Hu

ng

ary

Malt

a

Esto

nia

Irela

nd

Icela

nd

Norw

ay

Au

str

ali

a

Sp

ain

Belg

ium

(Fl.

)

Au

str

ia

Den

mark

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

A development or training plan for teachers to improve their teaching

Emphasis placed by teachers on improving student test scores in their teaching

Teaching of students with special learning needs

Teaching of students in a multicultural setting%

Countries are ranked in descending order of the percentage of teachers who have received no ap-praisal or feedback.Source: OECD. Table 5.1 and 5.3

Percentage of teachers reporting that appraisal and feedback led to a moderate or large change in the following:

Page 62: Benchmarking International Best Practice

7878P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eDoes appraisal and feedback make a difference for the job?

Figure 5.5

Ma

laysia

Lit

hu

an

ia

Bu

lgari

a

Pola

nd

Slo

ven

ia

Esto

nia

Slo

vak R

ep

ub

lic

Bra

zil

Me

xic

o

De

nm

ark

TA

LIS

Avera

ge

Hu

ng

ary

No

rway

Ice

lan

d

Ita

ly

Kore

a

Au

str

ali

a

Ire

lan

d

Sp

ain

Tu

rkey

Port

ug

al

Au

str

ia

Ma

lta

Belg

ium

(Fl.

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Opportunities for professional development activitiesA change in the likelihood of career advancementPublic recognition from the principal and/or colleaguesChanges in work responsibilites that make the job more attractive

%

Countries are ranked in descending order of changes in teachers' opportunities for professional develop-ment activities.Source: OECD. Table 5.5.

Page 63: Benchmarking International Best Practice

7979P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

ePerception of teachers of the impact of appraisal and

feedback in their school

Mal

aysia

Bulga

ria

Polan

dItal

y

Slova

k Rep

ublic

Hunga

ry

Mex

ico

Slove

nia

Turk

ey

Lith

uani

a

TALI

S Ave

rage

Esto

nia

Brazil

Portu

gal

Icel

and

Mal

ta

Austr

ia

Korea

Spain

Denm

ark

Austr

alia

Irel

and

Norway

Belgi

um (F

l.)80

60

40

20

0

20

40

60

80

Teachers who would receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards if they improve the quality of their teaching

Teachers who would receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards if they are more innovative in their teaching

%

Countries are ranked in descending order of percentage of teachers reporting to receive increased monetary or non-monetary rewards for an improvement in the quality of their teaching. Source: OECD. Table 5.9.

Figure 5.7

Page 64: Benchmarking International Best Practice

8080P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eSome teachers are left alone

Teachers who received no appraisal or feedback and teachers in schools that had no school evaluation in the previous five years

Figure 5.3

Ita

ly

Sp

ain

Po

rtu

ga

l

Ire

lan

d

Bra

zil

Ice

lan

d

No

rwa

y

Au

str

ia

Au

str

ali

a

Be

lgiu

m (

Fl.

)

Ma

lta

Tu

rke

y

Me

xic

o

De

nm

ark

Po

lan

d

Ko

rea

Slo

ve

nia

Hu

ng

ary

Esto

nia

Slo

va

k R

ep

ub

lic

Lit

hu

an

ia

Ma

laysia

Bu

lga

ria

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

No appraisal or feedback No school evaluation%

Countries are ranked in descending order of the percentage of teachers who have received no appraisal or feedback.Source: OECD. Table 5.1 and 5.3

Page 65: Benchmarking International Best Practice

8181P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

eSchool principals according to their level of

management styles by country

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

Australia

Austria

Belgium (Fl.)

Brazil

Bulgaria

Denmark

Estonia

Hungary

Iceland

IrelandItaly

Korea

Lithuania

Malaysia

Malta

MexicoNorway

Poland

Portugal Slovak Republic Slovenia

Spain

Turkey

Countries in green have a high average in principal involvement in decision making, while countries in red principals have lower than average.Source: OECD

Figure 6.2

Score on instructional leadership scale

Sco

re o

n a

dm

inis

trati

ve lead

ers

hip

sca

le

Page 66: Benchmarking International Best Practice

8282P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Significan

t variables in

the fina

l net models

: Self

-efficacy

 > ISCED5 (Bachelor degree)

FemaleFull-time

employmentPermanent Contract

Years of teaching

Australia     +    Austria     +   -

Belgium (Fl.) -     +  Brazil       -  Bulgaria   -      Denmark     + +  Estonia       +  Hungary          Iceland          Ireland          Italy     +    Korea + - + + +Lithuania          Malaysia + -     +Malta         +Mexico +        Norway +     +  Poland   -      Portugal +        

Slovak Republic     +   +Slovenia       + -Spain          

Turkey       + +

Page 67: Benchmarking International Best Practice

8383P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Significan

t variables in

the final net models: Self-efficacy

 

Number of days of

professional developmen

t

School providing induction process

for teachers

School providing

mentor for new

teachers

Australia      Austria      Belgium (Fl.)      Brazil      Bulgaria     +Denmark +    Estonia +   +Hungary      Iceland +    Ireland      Italy +    Korea +    Lithuania +    Malaysia +    Malta +    Mexico +    Norway      Poland      Portugal +    Slovak Republic      Slovenia +    Spain      

Turkey      

Page 68: Benchmarking International Best Practice

8484P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Significan

t variables in

the final

net models:

Self-

efficacy

 

Index of teacher-student relations

Index of classroom teaching practice:

structuring

Index of classroom teaching practice: student-oriented

Index of classroom teaching practice: enhanced activities

Index of direct transmission beliefs about instruction

Australia + +      Austria + + + - +Belgium (Fl.) + +     +Brazil +       +Bulgaria +       +Denmark +       +Estonia +   +    Hungary +   +    Iceland + +      Ireland + +   + +Italy +     + +Korea + + +   +Lithuania +   +   +Malaysia + +      Malta +        Mexico + +     +Norway + +     +Poland + -   + +Portugal + + +   +

Slovak Republic +   +   +Slovenia +   +   +Spain + +     +

Turkey +   +   +

Page 69: Benchmarking International Best Practice

8585P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Significant variables in

the fina

l net models

: Self

-efficacy

 

Index of constructivi

st beliefs about

instruction

Index of exchange and coordination for teaching

Index of professional collaboration

Australia +    Austria +   +Belgium (Fl.) +   +Brazil      Bulgaria     +Denmark +    Estonia +   +Hungary +   +Iceland +   +Ireland +    Italy +    Korea +   +Lithuania +    Malaysia   +  Malta +    Mexico      Norway + +  Poland +   +Portugal +   +

Slovak Republic +    Slovenia +    Spain +   +

Turkey +    

Page 70: Benchmarking International Best Practice

8686P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Significan

t variables in

the final

net models:

Self-

efficacy

 

Never received

appraisal or feedback from any source

Work in schools that did not have an evaluation

within the last 5 years

Effective teachers receive more monetary

or non-monetary

rewards in the school.

Important aspect for teacher

appraisal: student test

scores*

Important aspect for teacher

appraisal: innovative teaching

practices* Australia          Austria          

Belgium (Fl.)          Brazil +   +   +Bulgaria          Denmark          Estonia       -  Hungary          Iceland         +Ireland          Italy          Korea          Lithuania          Malaysia          Malta          Mexico          Norway          Poland          Portugal         +

Slovak Republic          Slovenia          Spain          

Turkey          

Page 71: Benchmarking International Best Practice

8787P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Significan

t variables in

the fina

l net models:

Self-

efficacy

 

Important aspect for teacher appraisal:

professional development undertaken*

Appraisal impact: a change in salary*

Appraisal impact: opportunities for

professional development activities*

Appraisal impact: public

recognition from the

principal and/or your

colleagues*

Australia        Austria       +

Belgium (Fl.)       +Brazil        Bulgaria        Denmark        Estonia       +Hungary       +Iceland        Ireland       +Italy       +Korea       +Lithuania       +Malaysia        Malta       +Mexico        Norway       +Poland        Portugal        

Slovak Republic        Slovenia        Spain       +

Turkey        

Page 72: Benchmarking International Best Practice

8888P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Significan

t variables in

the final

net models:

Self-

efficacy

 

Appraisal impact: changes in teachers' work responsibilities

that make the job more attractive*

School evaluation published*

Important aspect for school evaluations:

student test scores*

Australia      Austria      Belgium (Fl.)      Brazil +    Bulgaria +    Denmark      Estonia +    Hungary      Iceland      Ireland      Italy      Korea      Lithuania      Malaysia      Malta      Mexico      Norway      Poland      Portugal +    

Slovak Republic      Slovenia +    Spain      

Turkey      

Page 73: Benchmarking International Best Practice

8989P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Significant variables in

the fina

l net models

: Self

-efficacy

 

Index of framing and

communicating the school goals and curricular

development

Index of promoting

instructional improvement

s and professional development

Index of supervision of instruction in

the school

Index of accountability

role of the principal

Index of bureaucratic rule-following

Australia          Austria          

Belgium (Fl.)          Brazil          Bulgaria          Denmark          Estonia          Hungary          Iceland          Ireland       +  Italy          Korea          Lithuania     +    Malaysia          Malta          Mexico          Norway          Poland          Portugal +        Slovak Republic          Slovenia          Spain          

Turkey          

Page 74: Benchmarking International Best Practice

9090P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Significant variables in the fina

l net models

: Self

-efficacy

 

Index of school

climate: student

delinquency

Index of school

climate: teachers’ working morale

Index of a lack of

personnel

Index of school

resources: shortage of materials

Index of school

autonomy in hiring

teachers and determining

salariesAustralia          Austria   -   +  

Belgium (Fl.)         -Brazil          Bulgaria          Denmark          Estonia          Hungary          Iceland          Ireland          Italy          Korea          Lithuania          Malaysia          Malta          Mexico          Norway          Poland          Portugal          Slovak Republic   -      Slovenia          Spain          

Turkey          

Page 75: Benchmarking International Best Practice

9191P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Significant variables in the fina

l net models: Self

-efficacy

 

Index of school

autonomy in budgeting

(formulating and allocating

the school budget)

Index of school

autonomy: student policy and textbooks

Index of school

autonomy in curriculum (courses offered, course

content)

School average class

size Public school

Australia          Austria          Belgium (Fl.)          Brazil          Bulgaria          Denmark          Estonia          Hungary   -      Iceland          Ireland         -Italy          Korea          Lithuania          Malaysia          Malta          Mexico          Norway         +Poland -        Portugal -        Slovak Republic          Slovenia          Spain          

Turkey          

Page 76: Benchmarking International Best Practice

9292P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Table 4.13

Job satisfaction (dependent on…)

 

Direct transmission beliefs about

teaching

Constructivist beliefs about

teaching

Structuring teaching practices

Student oriented teaching practices

Australia        

Austria        

Belgium (Fl.) -      

Brazil   - +  

Bulgaria +      

Denmark        

Estonia        

Hungary +      

Iceland        

Ireland        

Italy        

Korea   +    

Lithuania   +   +

Malaysia        

Malta        

Mexico        

Norway     -  

Poland        

Portugal + - +  Slovak Republic +      

Slovenia     -  

Spain +   +  

Turkey +      

Page 77: Benchmarking International Best Practice

9393P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Job satisfaction

(depende

nt on…)

 Enhanced activities

Classroom disciplinary

climate

Teacher-student relations

Teacher's self-efficacy

Australia   + + +Austria   + + +

Belgium (Fl.)   + + +Brazil   + + +Bulgaria   + + +Denmark   + + +Estonia   + + +Hungary   + + +Iceland   + + +Ireland   + + +Italy   + + +Korea   + + +Lithuania   + + +Malaysia   + + +Malta   + + +Mexico   + + +Norway   + + +Poland   + + +Portugal   + + +

Slovak Republic   + + +Slovenia   + + +Spain   + + +

Turkey   + + +

Table 4.13

Page 78: Benchmarking International Best Practice

9494P

uttin

g th

e W

orld

in

to W

orld

-Cla

ss E

duca

tion

Wa

shin

gton

, Ju

ly 1

0, 2

009

Ben

chm

ark

ing

inte

rna

tio

na

l b

est

pra

ctic

e

Thank you !