unesco institute for statistics reassessing international benchmarks for tertiary education systems...

UNESCO INSTITUTE for STATISTICS

Reassessing international benchmarks for tertiary education systems

Albert MotivansUNESCO Institute for Statistics

Benchmarking Education Systems for Results21-23 June 2010, Singapore


International benchmarking and comparisons across countries are now the lingua franca in education policy and public debates

Greater attention has also led to higher stakes and more attention to the quality of indicators, for example in the case of tertiary education

The growing importance of benchmarks


Expanding tertiary systemsTertiary enrolment grew by more than four-fold between 1975 and 2008

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

16019

70

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

Terti

ary

stud

ents

(mill

ions

)

Sub-SaharanAfrica

Arab States

South and WestAsia

East Asia and thePacific

Latin Americaand theCaribbeanCentral Asia

Central andEastern Europe

North Americaand WesternEurope

ISCED97ISCED76

19750.8M

19851.1M

19951.7M

20072.8M

Mobile tertiary students – those who study abroad, more than tripled

Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Aus

tral

ia

New

Zea

land

Rep

ublic

of K

orea

Japa

n

Mac

ao, C

hina

Thai

land

Hon

g K

ong

(Chi

na)

Phili

ppin

es

Mal

aysi

a

Chi

na

Mya

nmar

Bru

nei D

arus

sala

m

Indo

nesi

a

Cam

bodi

a

Lao

Cub

a

Pana

ma

Bra

zil

Mex

ico

Chi

le

Col

ombi

a

Arg

entin

a

El S

alva

dor

Guy

ana

Aru

ba

Gua

tem

ala

Finl

and

Icel

and

Den

mar

k

Nor

way

Irela

nd

Net

herla

nds Italy

Swed

en

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom Sp

ain

Isra

el

Can

ada

Fran

ce

Uni

ted

Stat

es o

f Am

eric

a

Ger

man

y

Liec

hten

stei

n

Switz

erla

nd

Bel

gium

Aus

tria

Gre

ece

Cyp

rus

And

orra

Gro

ss g

radu

atio

n ra

tio (%

)

5A first degree ISCED 5B

East Asia and the Pacific Latin America and the Caribbean North American and Western Europe

Who produces the most tertiary graduates?Gross graduation ratio of first-time qualifications of ISCED 5A and 5B programmes


How mobile are tertiary students?Mobile students as a percentage of tertiary enrolment, 1999 and 2008

4.94.6

2.8

1.71.61.41.30.9

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

LatinAmericaand the

Caribbean

South andWest Asia

NorthAmerica

andWesternEurope

Centraland

EasternEurope

East Asiaand thePacific

ArabStates

CentralAsia

Sub-Saharan

Africa

Out

boun

d m

obili

ty ra

tio (%

)

2008 1999

World =1.9



Recent critiques of international benchmarks for tertiary systems Interpretation/use of indicators

• Analysis of indicators is not contextualised• Focus on relative measures hides absolute figures• Problems with rankings

Indicator methodology• ISCED classifications of tertiary education programmes are

too heterogenous• Limitations of population-based graduation rates• Coverage of part-time students, foreign students is unclear

Clifford Adelman (2009), The spaces between numbersHauptman and Fritschler (2009) The use and misuse of international data in higher education


Where do international indicators come from?International framework for

education statistics National programmes are

mapped according to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED97)

Data are provided to UNESCO, OECD and Eurostat via three instruments and a common indicator methodology

WEI is a special programme which bridges UIS and OECD methodologies.

Survey Scope ContentUNESCO Institute for Statistics

+/- 150 countries

Basic data: pupils, teachers, finances

World Education Indicators (WEI)

16 countries China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka,Thailand

More policy variables – can compare to OECD countries, but also to decide on own indicators

UNESCO-OECD-EUROSTAT

42 countries Japan, Rep. of Korea

System-level data and policy design


Challenges of ensuring comparability across diverse tertiary systems


Revising the international standard (ISCED97)

Global consultation on ISCED2011 now underway (www.uis.unesco.org)

Changing contexts• Strong expansion and differentiation in education• Convergence in approaches to organise tertiary education

provision (e.g., Bologna process in Europe) Shortcomings in the existing ISCED97 classification

• Completion and attainment not defined• Difficult to apply standard to calculate graduation rates• Unclear instructions for special cases (e.g., o-levels,

bridging programmes, adult education)


Improved classification of tertiary programmes

Five post-secondary levels, Four tertiary levels Distinguishes BA and MA and equivalent programmes

• Reflects European Bologna process Simplifies dimensions within levels Improves hierarchy in tertiary levels

• No implicit hierarchy of vocational/academic Qualifications added as a criterion for completion and

attainment


Addressing the critics Promote interpretation and use of data

• Recognise contextual factors• Use both relative/absolute perspectives• Use wide range of indicators

Improve tools • Refine ISCED classification categories (ISCED2011)• Stronger compliance to reporting standards (e.g.,

peer reviews)• Seek alternative indicators

Transparency is essential


Agenda for international benchmarking More focus on regional priorities and working

directly with countries (WEI approach) More flexible platforms for regional data collection More focus on gaps in data and indicators needed to

inform key policy issues, including:• Education quality• Financing education• Human resource development

Data use and analysis – regional reporting

unesco institute for statistics reassessing international benchmarks for tertiary education systems...

Documents