Greater equity in education

Global

Voices

Better education for some or a mediocre education for all is a false choice, says a new OECD study.

BEN LEVIN (ben.levin@utoronto. ca) is a professor and Canada Research Chair in education policy and leadership at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Canada. 74

Kappan

April 2012

| n overview 

n Ben Levin

Greater equity in education In recent years, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has put a considerable focus on improving equity in education outcomes. One key aspect of this has been the advent of its inter-

national testing program, PISA — the Programme for International Student Assessment — which measures the skills of 15-year-olds in more than 60 countries around the world. From its outset in 2000, PISA made equity of outcomes as important as the av-

erage level of outcomes. PISA results have demonstrated quite clearly that countries don’t have to choose between excellence for some and mediocrity for all. Instead, national education systems can produce high levels of achievement with relatively low levels of inequality. Andreas Schleicher, who heads PISA, has given many eloquent talks around the world on this theme. While the rhetoric of “all students can learn” preceded PISA, the realization that some large education systems are consistently achieving that goal has made it impossible for anyone to argue successfully that the price of education excellence must be a high level of inequality. But OECD has gone well beyond PISA in its attention to equality issues. Especially in the last 10 years, equity challenges have been a major feature of OECD education studies and reports. In February, OECD released Equity and Quality in Education: Supporting Disadvantaged Students and Schools, a follow-up to a 2007 report that suggested ways schools and systems could increase equity based on policies and practices in a number of OECD countries. The key contention of the February report is in the following two sentences from its foreword: The evidence shows that equity can go hand-in-hand with quality and that reduc-

ing school failure strengthens individuals’ and societies’ capacities to respond to recession and contribute to economic growth and social well-being. This means that investing in high-quality schooling and equal opportunities for all from the early years to at least the end of upper secondary is the most profitable educational policy. (p. 3)

That argument is spelled out in more detail in the first part of the report and then turned into 10 policy recommendations to produce greater equity without threatening quality. These recommendations fall into two areas — system-level policies to support equity and strategies to improve performance in high-need or low-performing schools. In the first category, OECD proposes five steps: 1. Eliminate grade repetition. 2. Avoid early tracking of students (into vocational education or special education). 3. Manage school choice so that it does not lead to greater inequity. 4. Make funding more responsive to differing school needs. 5. Have more high-quality pathways in secondary schooling leading to good outcomes. Thinkstock/Hemera

Comments? Like PDK at www. facebook.com/pdkintl

In terms of working with high-need schools, the organization suggests five more strategies: 1. Strengthen school leadership. 2. Create a positive climate for learning. 3. Keep good teachers in high-need schools. 4. Ensure effective classroom practices. 5. Link closely with parents and communities. These recommendations are hardly radical. Nor should they be, since they’re quite firmly grounded in many years of research. Moreover, as the report shows, each is in place in some high-performing systems so they have the sanction of empirical evidence and experience. On the other hand, few education systems have securely embedded all of these features, and quite a few systems actively contradict at least some of them. Virtually every system around the world, whether a district or a nation, could benefit from paying serious attention to the set as a whole. Why don’t countries implement these policies and practices if they’re known to be effective? There are at least a couple of reasons one could adduce. First, some of these proposals are quite easy to put in a sentence, but very difficult to implement. For example, having effective classroom practices in all classrooms is an enormous undertaking that involves changing the daily behavior of many thousands of adults. And ensuring that high-challenge schools are staffed with highly skilled teachers has turned out to be a very difficult challenge in most settings, requiring special measures in every setting.

Although these policies may have support from research, they don’t always have public or professional support. No policy, no matter how well grounded in research, can be put into place or sustained if it lacks professional and public support. The debate in many countries about retaining students in grade is a good example of an issue where there is much evidence that simply doesn’t accord with public opinion.

3 conclusions First, simply advocating policies, even by a prestigious international organization, doesn’t necessarily lead to their widespread adoption. An organization such as OECD cannot cause the adoption of particular policies around the world — unless there is already significant support for those policies. OECD’s ideas can be influential if they fall on fertile ground. That’s why some of the ideas promoted by OECD have been adopted in some countries, to some degree, while other countries have rejected the same ideas. Second, the real influence of work such as this may be how it sets the agenda for local policy discussions. Various parties in a jurisdiction can use reports by OECD or other bodies to support their own views about what should be done. So, even if particular recommendations aren’t accepted, the terms of the debate may be influenced by these international analyses. An example would be shifting the education policy debate from a focus on competition among schools to a focus on improving all schools. Finally, all of this discussion makes clear that the real work of creating appropriate policies and practices in schools must occur in local settings with significant effort over

long periods of time. This work involves building support for specific policies and practices as well as building people’s skills in understand-

PISA results have demonstrated quite clearly that countries don’t have to

worked hard to bring it into widespread practice in a collaborative way over many years. International policy analyses can play an important role in this process, but they only matter in the end if they’re consistent with local and national beliefs, practices, K and commitments.

choose between excellence for some and mediocrity

Reference

for all.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2012). Equity and quality in education: Supporting disadvantaged students and schools. Paris, France: Author.

ing and implementing those policies and practices. A clear lesson from successful jurisdictions is that they developed an approach to education and

What is OECD? The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) is made up of 34 countries, mainly the richer countries of Europe, Asia, and North America. It has existed since the 1960s with a mission of providing advice and a forum for the exchange of policy ideas related to economic and social development. The Parisbased organization maintains a staff of about 2,500 and publishes more than 200 reports per year on many areas related to economic and social policy. Critics say the OECD has been part of the effort to impose western market economy ideas around the world, not only in economic policy but in areas such as education. Along with the World Bank, OECD has been accused of supporting a focus on economic growth, minimization of taxes, and the importance of choice and competition at the expense of equity and social justice. Yet, in the last few years, at least in its education work, the organization has put a considerable focus on improving equity in education outcomes. OECD countries Australia

France

Korea

Slovenia

Austria

Germany

Luxembourg

Spain

Belgium

Greece

Mexico

Sweden

Canada

Hungary

Netherlands

Switzerland

Chile

Iceland

New Zealand

Turkey

Czech Republic

Ireland

Norway

Denmark

Israel

Poland

United Kingdom

Estonia

Italy

Portugal

Finland

Japan

Slovak Republic

V93 N7

United States

kappanmagazine.org

75