Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Growing Smarter: Education Quality and Economic Growth in East Asia and the
PacificWorld Bank East Asia and the Pacific Regional Flagship Report – Fall 2017
Michael Crawford, Amer Hasan, Raja Kattan, Sachiko Kataoka, Dilaka Lathapipat, Andrew Ragatz, Anny Wong, Neda Bostani, Andrew Coflan, Melissa Merchant, Yilin Pan, Elisabeth Sedmik
A flagship report on education quality and growth in East Asia and the Pacific (EAP)
Outline of today’s talk
• EAP economies have (by far) the world’s best record of economic growth over the past four decades.
• Investments in education have been unmatched in quantity and quality
• Benefits continue to accrue to individuals and countries
Sneak preview
• Education policies and practices “crowd in learning” in successful countries
• Lessons from the policies and practices that lead to high performance are relevant globally and regionally
2
The EAP region: A half-century of stellar growth
3
5.3%
3.9%
3.0%2.7% 2.9%
2.6%
3.5%
8.4%
5.1%
5.6%
3.6%
4.7% 4.6%
5.4%
5.0%
7.2%
7.7%8.0%
8.9%
7.2% 7.3%
5.3%
7.8%
6.1%
4.6%5.0% 5.1%
5.7%
1961-1970 1971-1980 1981-1990 1991-2000 2001-2010 2011-2015 1961-2015
World EAP EAP (DEV) EAP (DEV w/o China)
Investments in human capital have paid dividends
4
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2015 GDP of EAP using different growth rates
EAP GDP at EAP growthwith China (1960 -2015)
EAP GDP at EAP growthwithout China (1960-2015)
EAP GDP at world growth(1960-2015)
Growing demand for education shows no sign of letting up
5
55
4846
42
35
32
60
5250
45
38
35
4442
40
37
3432
1991 1995 2000 2005 2010 2012
Share of Employment in Agriculture
EAP EAP-DEV World
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
1998-2000 2008-2010
Group C AverageEnrollment
Group C AverageReturns to TertiaryEducation
Average Tertiary Enrollment Rates and Returns to Education
Gaps in attainment have been closed
6
2.863.36
4.09
5.00
5.94
7.13
7.97
1.34
2.20
3.25
4.57
5.57
7.03
7.90
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010World EAP
While challenges remain in some countries
7
5.56
6.286.71
8.35
9.44
10.66
11.59
0.71
1.57
2.78
4.16
5.28
6.93
7.53
1.06 1.62
2.52
3.48
4.15
5.46
7.…
0.88 1.00 1.20
1.88
2.68
3.35
4.29
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Group A Group B Group C Group D
EAP countries are the top scorers on PISA
8
Albania
Algeria
Argentina
Australia
AustriaBelgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Canada
Chile
China (B-S-J-G)
Colombia
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
EstoniaFinland
France
Georgia
Greece
Hong Kong SAR, China
HungaryIceland
Indonesia
Israel
Italy
Japan
Kazakhstan
Korea
Kosovo
LithuaniaLuxembourg
Macao SAR, China
Malaysia
Mexico
Moldova
New Zealand
Norway
Peru
Poland Portugal
Qatar
Romania
Russian Federation
Singapore
Spain Sweden
Switzerland
Thailand Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States
Uruguay
Vietnam
350
400
450
500
550
600
0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000
PIS
A 2
01
5 S
co
re in
Scie
nce
GDP per capita in 2015 or latest, PPP (constant 2011 International $), World Bank ICP
…and on TIMSS
Hong Kong
Indonesia
Japan
Korea Singapore
Hong Kong
Japan
Korea
Malaysia
Singapore
Thailand
350
400
450
500
550
600
0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000
TIM
SS
2015 S
co
res i
n S
cie
nce
GDP per capita in 2015 or latest, PPP (constant 2011 International $), World Bank ICP
EASTERN EUROPE
& CENTRAL ASIA EAST ASIA
& PACIFIC
WESTERN EUROPE
& US/CANADA
MIDDLE EAST
& NORTH AFRICA
4th Grade
8th Grade
9
GDP per capita in 2015
or latest, PPP (constant
2011 International $)
Science mean score
in PISA 2015
Prediction of Science
mean score based on
the regression
The difference
between true score
and predicted score
The difference
between true score
and predicted score
in years of schooling
Japan 35804 538 479 59 2.0
Korea 34387 516 477 39 1.3
Singapore 80192 556 516 40 1.3
B-S-J-G (China) 22037 518 457 61 2.0
Vietnam 5668 525 394 131 4.4
Indonesia 10385 403 422 -19 -0.6
Thailand 15345 421 440 -19 -0.6
Malaysia 25308 443 463 -20 -0.7
10
Student learning is years ahead
What explains success?
11
12
Leadership Effective Administration
Sound FinanceAttention to
Equity
Effective Teaching &
Learning
Curriculum
Readiness to Learn
Support for Teachers
Student Assessments
National vision forhuman capital-driven growth
• Unshakeable commitment to develop skills for prosperity
• Initial focus on basic literacy and numeracy is the foundation of “progressive universalism”
• Curricula relevant to economic challenges: emphasis on TVET as manufacturing grew
• Aspirations to join the advanced countries at the “technological frontier”
Sound administrative systems set conditions for learning
• Vietnam’s Fundamental School Quality Audits ensured basic infrastructure for learning
• Japan: budgetary autonomy conceded to high-performing schools
• Korea and Vietnam report no problems particular problems with teacher absenteeism.
• Other EAP countries still struggle with chronic absenteeism among teachers
Spending mattersbeyond a point more is not necessarily better
Albania
Bulgaria
Brazil
Chile
Colombia Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Dominican Republ
Spain
Estonia
Georgia
Hungary
Indonesia
Israel
Jordan
LithuaniaLatvia
MoldovaMexico
New Zealand
Peru
Poland
Romania
Slovak Republic
Thailand
Vietnam
350
370
390
410
430
450
470
490
510
530
550
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000
Public expenditure per student (constant 2013 PPP$)
Average PISA 2015 Reading Score vs. Public Expenditure per Student (constant 2013 PPP$)
…and spend to promote equity
• Policies and practices to promote equity and minimize gaps in the system in successful economies in the region include:
• Equitable budget allocation across the system.
• Balanced quality of school by rotating teachers and principals.
• Engaging high performing teachers to support other schools and teachers.
• Providing additional allocation of assistant teachers for low performing schools.
• This is reflected in general equity in international assessments like PISA.
Group B: poorer students learn more than their OECD counterparts
18
444
470
486
508
537
488
516
533
549
574
476
506
522
539
581
384
398406
419
454
Quintile
1
Quintile
2
Quintile
3
Quintile
4
Quintile
5
OECD Group A
Group B Group C
436
460
475
497
525
485
514
533
548
575
470
503
520
535
576
366
381390
410
450
Quintile
1
Quintile
2
Quintile
3
Quintile
4
Quintile
5
OECD Group A
Group B Group C
445
471
486
507
534
474
503
519
534
558
442
476
494
512
555
373
389399
414
451
Quintile
1
Quintile
2
Quintile
3
Quintile
4
Quintile
5
OECD Group A
Group B Group C
…and their lowest scorers learn as much as Group C’s average students
19
Source: Author’s calculations, OECD PISA 2015 Data
615615
487
354
631
517
390
491
612
367
602
646
353
531
410
478
517
646
503
402
303
397
506
389
296
653
322
410
505488
532
650
328
403
520
640
398
Vietnam shows high scores and equity go together
20
431
479
504522
576
366384
393407
445461
471479
497
529
Quintile
1
Quintile
2
Quintile
3
Quintile
4
Quintile
5
B-S-J-G (China) Indonesia
Vietnam
474
519
541556
604
353369
379
398
443
463478
488506
542
Quintile
1
Quintile
2
Quintile
3
Quintile
4
Quintile
5
B-S-J-G (China) Indonesia
Vietnam
461
504
525543
594
376392 399
410
447
501510
518532
565
Quintile
1
Quintile
2
Quintile
3
Quintile
4
Quintile
5
B-S-J-G (China) Indonesia
Vietnam
Japan & KoreaFirst kindergartens start in early 1900s
VietnamECEC history
begins in 1954
ChinaUnified policy
issued by Ministries of
Interior, Education and
Public Health on KG in rural areas
1900s 1970s 1990s 2000s1950s
PhilippinesBarangay Day
Care Law
LaosPreschool legislation
Cambodia5% of 3-5 year
olds covered by preschools
Malaysia42% of 4-6 year
olds covered
IndonesiaECE included in
2004-2009 Strategic Plan
Investments in ECD began earlier in high-performing countries
21
Enrollment gaps are narrowing, spending gaps are not
57 88
1,506 1,696
5,103
6,047
6,670
-
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
Indonesia Guangxi* Shanghai* Brazil Japan Korea OECDAverage
Public spending on pre-primary education (for children aged 3 and older), 2009
22
Differences in readiness to learn start early and persist
22.5
33.5
44.5
5
Avera
ge S
core
48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60Age of child (months)
Poor
Rich
Language and Cognitive Development Domain
.5.6
.7.8
.91
Fra
ction p
assin
g S
tage 1
48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60Age of child (months)
Poor
Rich
Test of executive functionDimensional Change Card Sort
23
Rural children aged 48-60 months, Indonesia, 2009.
..with lasting repercussions for learning
24
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Group A Group B Group C
PISA 2015 Reading
Difference between those with none or less than one year of ECE and those with more than one year
30 points is equivalent to one year of learning
EAP’s high-performing countries have cohesive teacher support systems
• Comprehensive support that enables teachers to develop and be effective
• Other areas of the education system tend to be aligned in ways that make the teacher’s job easier
Teachers are given sufficient time for preparation…
26
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
No
rway
Ro
man
ia
Cyp
rus
Ne
the
rlan
ds
Mal
aysi
a
Sin
gap
ore
Ital
y
Swed
en
Jap
an
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Isra
el
Serb
ia
Bu
lgar
ia
Au
stra
lia
Fran
ce
Po
lan
d
Spai
n
Ko
rea
Den
mar
k
Icel
and
Flan
de
rs (
Bel
giu
m)
Latv
ia
Ave
rage
Cro
atia
Engl
and
(U
nit
ed K
ingd
om
)
Slo
vak
Rep
ub
lic
Fin
lan
d
Po
rtu
gal
Esto
nia
Ab
u D
hab
i (U
nit
ed A
rab
Em
irat
es)
Mex
ico
Bra
zil
Alb
erta
(C
anad
a)
Ch
ile
Un
ited
Sta
tes
Average hours spent teaching and working per week
Hours spent on teaching Total working hours
Concentrate on fewer topics…
Tota
l Nu
mb
er
of
Top
ics
Ko
rea
Jap
anH
on
g K
on
gG
reec
eR
om
ania
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Ger
man
yIs
rael
Sin
gap
ore
Sou
th A
fric
aC
ypru
sB
ulg
aria
Swed
enN
eth
erla
nd
sSl
ova
k R
epu
blic
Den
mar
kFr
ance
Hu
nga
ryIc
elan
dSc
otl
and
Au
stri
aC
anad
aC
olo
mb
iaIr
elan
dR
uss
ian
Fed
erat
ion
Au
stra
liaP
ort
uga
lSp
ain
No
rway
Slo
ven
iaSw
itze
rlan
dLa
tvia
New
Zea
lan
dU
SA
Content Standards
79 8 19 22 25 29 33 35 37 38 39 41 43 47 48 48 50 50 53 56 57 58 58 58 61 62 66 66 66 69 69 69 70 79 79
Textbook Coverage
79 38 17 37 49 53 49 32 32 27 49 53 57 49 67 49 9 37 62 46 44 60 74 65 58 42 65 64 67 61 62 78 35 52 78
Topics tested in Standards
48 6 18 17 22 19 22 21 25 27 26 31 28 34 32 29 29 30 36 42 42 36 38 43 42 37 43 40 43 41 44 44 44 48 48
Topics Tested in Textbook
48 29 15 26 37 33 30 22 21 20 35 39 37 32 43 30 8 25 43 30 36 39 46 46 40 28 44 39 41 40 41 48 24 37 48
Source: Schmidt, William H., et al. Why Schools Matter: A Cross-National Comparison of Curriculum and Learning.
Number of Science Topics on TIMSS Science 2011 in the Curriculum for Each Country
..and think they have room to improve as professionals
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Jap
an
Ho
ng
Ko
ng,
SA
R
Thai
lan
d
Sin
gap
ore
Ch
ines
e Ta
ipei
Geo
rgia
Swed
en
Ital
y
Au
stra
lia
Can
ada
(Qu
ebec
)
Mo
rocc
o
Ru
ssia
n F
eder
atio
n
No
rway
Ko
rea,
Rep
ub
lic o
f
New
Ze
alan
d
Iran
, Isl
amic
Rep
ub
lic o
f
No
rway
Mal
aysi
a
Engl
and
Irel
and
Can
ada
Hu
nga
ry
Mal
ta
Turk
ey
Tab
le A
vera
ge
Can
ada
(On
tari
o)
Un
ited
Sta
tes
Bo
tsw
ana
Lith
uan
ia
Kaz
akh
stan
Jord
an
Sau
di A
rab
ia
Egyp
t
Sou
th A
fric
a
Ku
wai
t
Un
ited
Ara
b E
mir
ates
(A
bu
…
Isra
el
Un
ited
Ara
b E
mir
ates
(D
ub
ai)
Qat
ar
Slo
ven
ia
Un
ited
Ara
b E
mir
ates
Leb
ano
n
Om
an
Ch
ile
Arg
enti
na,
Bu
eno
s A
ires
Bah
rain
In teaching mathematics to this class, how would you characterize your confidence in developing students’ higher-order thinking skills?
Low Medium High Very high
Source: 2015 TIMSS
30
Classification Group 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015
JapanHI1 A ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
KoreaHI1 A ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
SingaporeHI1 A ✓ ✓ ✓
Hong Kong, SAR (China)HI1 / ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Macao, SAR (China)HI1 / ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Shanghai (China)DEV / ✓ ✓
B-S-J-G (China)DEV B ✓
VietnamDEV B ✓ ✓
IndonesiaDEV C ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
ThailandDEV C ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
MalaysiaDEV C ✓ ✓*
PISA Participating Countries/Economies (2000-2015)
More countries are benchmarking
Successful countries assess learning
• High performing systems in the region have integrated systems in which assessments of student learning link to teachers, students, and curriculum (virtuous circles).
• Successful EAP education systems measure learning results at both aggregate and individual levels.
• They have systemic ways of taking actions based on assessment (to support teaching and learning, inform policy and foster accountability).
And integrate their assessment systems
Large Scale and System Level Assessment
• International large scale assessments used systematically by high performing countries in the region (groups A & B) to benchmark and compel education quality reforms
• Early Grade Reading and Mathematics Assessments (EGRA/EGMA) also used to gauge system performance and inform policy change (particularly in Groups C & D)
Examinations
• National Examinations have played a prominent role in EAP’s high performing education systems
• Examinations have been utilized to allocate learning opportunities, gauge teacher effectiveness and set school rankings
• EAP’s education systems are now looking at how to go beyond these examinations as curricula evolve
Classroom Assessment
• In the classroom, assessed performance of students and continuous use of assessment can be used to improve instruction and learning
• Teacher developed tests are used in schools across the region to guide student learning and adapt teaching to students’ needs (PISA 2015)
• Classroom assessment guidelines should be integrated with curricula and teacher development
EGRA/EGMA –a starting point for measurement
34
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
Myanmar (2014)
Indonesia (2014)
Philippines - Cebuano (2015)
Tonga (2009)
Laos (2012)
Philippines - Ilokano (2015)
Timor-Leste (2011)
Cambodia (2012)
Philippines - Hiligaynon (2015)
Vanuatu (2010)
Letter knowledge zero scores (Grades 2 and 3)
Thank you!
• Conference Twitter feed: #BasicED
• Look for the report in Fall 2017
• Contact: [email protected]
36
