No More Failures 10 steps to equity in

No More Failures: 10 steps to equity in education FAIRNESS AND INCLUSION International Conference Trondheim, Norway 4 June 2007

The study rests on: • Work in and by ten countries in particular… • …Belgium (Flanders), Finland, France, Hungary, Norway, the Russian Federation, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland. . . • …and more than 1000 people in those countries • …policy makers, experts, rapporteurs, teachers, students, parents, community groups, trade unions.

The OECD secretariat report • Entitled “No more failures: 10 steps to equity in education” • Prepared by Beatriz Pont, Malgorzata Kuczera and Simon Field

Step 1: Limit early tracking and streaming and postpone academic selection. • Why? Early tracking, probably bad for equity, no evidence improves overall outcomes. • Stakeholders? • Obstacles. • It can be done. Teachers, parents of those doing well and those doing badly Entrenched institutional and cultural divides between different tracks Sweden half century ago, Spain a decade ago, Poland.

Step 2: Manage school choice so as to contain the risks to equity • Why? • Stakeholders? • Obstacles. • It can be done. Choice may damage equity by increasing social differences between schools Parents, school heads, teachers, political leaders When complexity in decision-making damages equity Lotteries in US, Japan for places for over-subscribed schools.

Step 3: In upper secondary education, provide attractive alternatives, remove dead ends and prevent drop out. • Why? Drop out has huge social costs and is an immense waste. Employment and social affairs as well as education ministries. • Stakeholders? • Obstacles. School-to-work routes for the weakest performers are awkward by definition. • It can be done. Nordic countries for dead ends, US Gates-funded scheme has tackled drop out

Step 4: Offer second chances to gain from education. • Why? • Stakeholders? • Obstacles. • It can be done. Intergenerational equity, Weak stakeholders. Adult learning institutions, employers, learners. Cost, potential competition with initial upper secondary education. Eg adult learning in Norway, Spain.

Step 5: Identify and provide systematic help to those who fall behind at school, and reduce year repetition. • Why? Comparative international evidence shows huge improvements possible. Evidence against year repetition compelling. Percentage of very poor readers at age 15: • Stakeholders? big differences between Parents/ countries. students at risk, school teachers. • Obstacles. • It can be done. Resource implications/ change in teacher culture required/ teacher resistance to removal of year repetition. Proven techniques for rescuing those falling behind, shifting incentives on schools using year repetition.

Step 6: Help disadvantaged parents to help their children to learn, strengthening the links between school and home. • Why? Parents role in education both crucial and a source of inequity. • Stakeholders? Parents and schools • Obstacles. • It can be done. The school gates After school homework clubs in many countries. Home school links in Sweden

Step 7: Respond to diversity and provide for the successful inclusion of migrants and minorities • Why? Variable attainment levels of migrants. Language issues. Employment discrimination • Stakeholders? • Obstacles. • It can be done. Migrant communities. Education institutions. Prejudice and intolerance. Pace of change in some countries Spanish welcome classes for immigrants, in Hungary successful schemes for

Step 8: Provide strong education for all, giving priority to early childhood provision and basic schooling. • Why? Early interventions more cost-effective • Stakeholders? Education sectors and their respective lobbies • Obstacles. • It can be done. Education sectors and their respective lobbies In England, strong shift in public spending away from tertiary towards early childhood.

Step 9: Direct resources to the students with the greatest needs, so that poorer communities have at least the same level of provision as those better off and schools in difficulty are supported. • Why? Inequality of provision • Stakeholders? Local/ regional government Schools / local communities • Obstacles. • It can be done. Stigmatisation Regional democracy and autonomy Dependent on local contexts International experience of needs -based funding

Step 10: Set concrete targets for more equity, particularly related to low school attainment and dropouts. • Why? Evidence that many countries could do better – comparison with best performers • Stakeholders? • Obstacles. • It can be done. Politicians, delivery agencies Avoiding distortions Targets which are realistic and demanding Scotland, EU

Two questions • Are these ten steps the right ones? • If so, what scope do you see for implementing them in your countries?

No More Failures: 10 steps to equity in education FAIRNESS AND INCLUSION International Conference Trondheim, Norway 4 June 2007