Raising the Quality of Educational Outcomes and Improving E-learning:

Cross-national Evidence on Challenges and Opportunities

Judit Kádár-FülöpIndicators and Analysis Division

Directorate for EducationOrganization for Economic Co-operation and

Development

12th EDEN ANNUAL CONFERENCE15-18 June 2003

Rhodes Palace Hotel, Rhodes, Greece

22 Challenges and opportunities

1. 1. Lifelong learning for all?2. 2. The PISA evidence

about students’ literacy skills… and the output of school systems

3. 3. The evidence of the OECD Upper Secondary School Survey

about the availability and use of ICT

about teachers’ use of ICT

4.4. Implications for development

33

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Denm

ark

Fin

land

Sw

eden

Uni

ted S

tate

s

Nor

way

New

Zeal

and

Uni

ted K

ingd

om

Germ

any

Sw

itze

rlan

d

Net

her

land

s

Aus

tral

ia

Can

ada

Cze

ch R

epu

blic

Ita

ly

Ire

land

Belg

ium

(Fl

.)

Hun

gary

Pola

nd

Port

ugal

Total participation in continuing education and training

Ratio of participation in continuing education and training for individuals with tertiaryeducation relative to individuals who have not completed lower secondary education

Participation rate in continuing education and training and ratio of participation based on

educational attainment for 25 to 64-year-olds (2001)

2

3

4

6

7

9

1

5

8

44

196

14 169 12

5 91

32

3127 24

24 22

21 2019

6

29

39 30 2831 27

33 31 27

19

14 1918 20

22 21 26 26 22

30

5 58 9 11 12 12 14

13

28

2 1 3 4 4 6 4 510

16

40%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Fin

land

Kor

ea

Irel

and

Uni

ted_

Kin

gdom

Fra

nce

Uni

ted_

Sta

tes

Spa

in

Ital

y

Ger

man

y

Mex

ico

Percentage of students at each of the proficiency levels in reading literacy

Level 2

Level 1

Below Level 1

1 65-7

1511-16

2119-24

2221-25

53-9

79-9

1610-20

31

Level 5

Level 4

Level 3

1917-21

55Not just about academic

performancePrevalence of disaffected students

17 18 19 19 20 20 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 22 23 23 24 25

30 30

38

41

0

10

20

30

40

50

Uni

ted K

ingd

om

Swed

en

Hun

gary

Irel

and

Net

her

land

s1

Aus

tria

Can

ada

Aus

tral

ia

Swit

zerl

and

Den

mar

k

New

Zea

land

Nor

way

Fin

land

Mex

ico

Ger

man

y

Ital

y

Spa

in

Uni

ted S

tate

s

Cze

ch R

epub

lic

Fra

nce

Jap

an

Kor

ea

% Disaff ected students

66

- 100

- 80

- 60

- 40

- 20

0

20

40

60

80

100Ge

rman

y

I tal

y

J apa

nUnite

d St

ates

Unite

d Ki

ngdo

m

Kore

a

I relan

d

Spai

n

Finlan

d

Swed

en

164-9

83-10

75-9

2221-25

2119-24

1610-20

10

9-11

1917-21

53-9

Is it all innate ability?Variation in student performance

77

- 100

- 80

- 60

- 40

- 20

0

20

40

60

80

100Ge

rman

y

I tal

y

J apa

nUnite

d St

ates

Unite

d Ki

ngdo

m

Kore

a

I relan

d

Spai

n

Finlan

d

Swed

en

Variation of performance

between schools

Variation of performance within

schools

164-9

83-10

75-9

2221-25

2119-24

1610-20

10

9-11

1917-21

53-9

Is it all innate ability?Variation in student performance

88Early selection and institutional stratification

Low degree of stratification

High degree of stratification

Finland

Korea

J apan

Iceland

Canada

I reland

Sweden

Spain

I taly

PolandGreece

Portugal

Luxembourg

Denmark

AustriaNorway

New ZealandAustralia

United Kingdom

BelgiumFrance

United States

SwitzerlandCzech Republik

HungaryGermany

430

450

470

490

510

530

550

-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25Low Performanc

e

HighPerformanc

e

Low Social equity

.

HighSocial equity

99

423

467

540

583

506

463

548

540

491

400

420

440

460

480

500

520

540

560

580

600

Low engagement Medium engagement High engagement

Rea

din

g Li

tera

cy P

erfo

rman

ce

Low socio- economic backgroundMedium socio- economic backgroundHigh socio- economic background

Reading literacy proficiency by levels of engagement and social background

1010 PISA assesses the performance

of 15-year-old students and

other outcomes of schooling in

OECD countries• every three

years•in key literacy

areas

www.pisa.oecd.org

1111

PISA shows the important role of...… Engagement and motivation… Effective learning strategies

Foundations for lifelong learning

Many of the successful education systems seek to shift the focus of education policy and practice…

… from helping students repeat solutions to solving problems and engaging in learning

–Learning to learn–Self-concept

1212

Computers can … generate engagement and

motivation …help develop effective learning strategies

Can schools promote e-learning?

Are schools equipped for using computers effectively?

To what extent do schools use computers?

1313 The OECD Survey of Upper Secondary Schools

Which countries? Belgium (Fl), Denmark, Finland, France,

Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Korea, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland

Which schools? School sites with upper secondary

programmes samples of 200 to 400 schools 4400 schools altogether

Which method? Questionnaire survey addressed to school

principals When was the survey implemented?

2001/2002

1414 The OECD Survey of Upper Secondary Schools

Availability of ICT in schools Use of ICT in schools by students

and teachers Professional development of

teachers Obstacles to development of ICT

in schools

1515Ratio of students to computers and ratio of teachers to computers in upper secondary

education (2001)

0

5

10

15

20

Den

mar

k

Sw

eden

Nor

way

Fin

land

Fra

nce

Kor

ea

Bel

gium

(F

l.)

Sw

itzer

land

Hun

gary

Italy

Irel

and

Por

tuga

l

Spa

in

Mex

ico

Net

herla

nds

1

Ratio

Ratio of students to computersRatio of teachers to computers

1616 How many students share a computer?

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90Denmark

Sw eden

Norw ay

Finland

France

Korea

Belgium (Fl.)

Sw itzerland

Hungary

Italy

Ireland

Portugal

Spain

Mexico

20<

11-20

5-10

1-4

Student

percentiles

20 students or more share a

computer

1 to 4 students more share a

computer

1717 How many teachers share a computer?

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90Korea 1.00 0.96 0.94 0.93 0.90 0.86 0.83 0.78 0.65

Sweden 2.59 2.09 1.79 1.56 1.35 1.26 1.08 0.93 0.80

Finland 6.43 4.60 3.45 2.71 2.14 1.71 1.31 0.97 0.77

Norway 4.65 3.50 2.88 2.44 2.00 1.77 1.37 1.17 0.92

Denmark 8.57 5.80 4.25 3.50 2.80 2.20 1.70 1.30 1.03

Switzerland 19.30 10.60 7.97 6.13 5.50 4.33 3.09 2.05 1.46

Hungary 24.75 14.40 10.83 8.42 6.83 5.43 4.57 3.75 2.79

Spain 24.13 14.90 11.38 9.13 7.00 6.00 5.21 4.21 3.28

Mexico 200.00 200.00 37.00 18.50 13.08 8.50 6.90 5.00 3.15

France 45.83 31.00 22.50 17.50 14.50 11.96 9.50 7.63 4.70

Ireland 39.00 22.00 18.75 14.00 11.63 10.20 8.33 6.40 4.83

Portugal 38.25 26.00 22.67 19.50 15.64 12.88 11.40 9.50 6.44

Italy 160.25 50.25 35.17 27.25 21.20 17.40 14.42 10.59 7.03

Belgium (Fl.) 69.00 48.25 30.80 24.50 19.75 16.17 12.58 9.88 6.83

10<

5 - 10

1 or less

2 - 4

Student

percentiles

More computers

than teachers

More than 10 teachers share a

computer

1818Percentage of schools with computers connected

to the Internet and to intranet

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sw

eden

Kor

ea

Nor

way

Den

mar

k

Fin

land

Sw

itzer

land

Hun

gary

Bel

gium

(F

l.)

Spa

in

Irel

and

Por

tuga

l

Fra

nce

Ital

y

Mex

ico

Net

herla

nds

1

Percentage of school computers connected to the InternetPercentage of school computers connected to the intranet

1919 Use of computers in schools

What kinds of activities? Which educational purposes? What about teachers?

Do they use ICT? Do they improve their

professional skills?

OECD International Survey of Upper Secondary Schools

2020 What kind of ICT activities?

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Operating acomputer

Writing with aword processor

Sending,searching for, andusing e-information

Calculating withspreadsheetsprogrammes

Using educationalsoftware (e.g.taking tests,exercises)

Makingillustrations with

graphicalprogrammes

Communicating viae-mail

Writingprogrammes

2121 For what purposes are computers used?

Percentage

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Obtain information fromthe Internet

Develop skills ofindependent learning

Provide additionalinstruction and practicingopportunities for students

Allow students tolearn/work at their ownpace during lessons

Combine parts of schoolsubjects with one another

Create opportunities forlearning by simulation

2222 Differences between schools in the variety of of educational use (purposes)

-2.50

-2.00

-1.50

-1.00

-0.50

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

De

nm

ark

Sw

ed

en

No

rwa

y

Italy

Sw

itze

rla

nd

Ko

rea

Po

rtu

ga

l

Fra

nce

Fin

lan

d

Me

xico

Be

lgiu

m (

Fl.)

Hu

ng

ary

Ire

lan

d

Sp

ain

Ne

the

rla

nd

s 1

10 to 25 25 to 75 75 to 90 Mean

Index

International mean

2323 Differences between schools in the variety of use of computers (2001)

-2.50

-2.00

-1.50

-1.00

-0.50

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

Den

mar

k

Sw

eden

Nor

way

Italy

Sw

itzer

land

Kor

ea

Por

tuga

l

Fra

nce

Fin

land

Mex

ico

Bel

gium

(F

l.)

Hun

gary

Irel

and

Spa

in

Net

herla

nds

1

10 to 25 25 to 75 75 to 90 MeanIndex

International mean

2424 Variety of ICT activities and ICT use

Switzerland

Sweden

Spain

Portugal

Norway

Mexico

Korea

Italy

Ireland

Hungary

France Finland

Denmark

Belgium (Fl.)

-1.00

-0.80

-0.60

-0.40

-0.20

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

-1.00 -0.80 -0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00Variety of computer-related student activities

Variety of educational goals

2525

0 20 40 60 80 100

Germany

Mexico

I reland

Belgium

Czech Republic

Luxembourg

United States

Switzerland

New Zealand

Finland

Sweden

Canada

Hungary

Denmark

Scotland

Australia

Home

Availability and frequency of the use of computers for 15-year-olds at home and at school

(2000)Distribution of mean percentages of 15-year-olds who reported having a computer

available to use and those who reported using computers at home and at school

020406080100

School

Availability of a computer to use almost every day, a few times each week or at least between once a week and once a month

Frequency of computer use almost every day, a few times each week or at least

between once a week and once a month

%

2626 Percentage of upper secondary students who attend schools where more than 60 % of teachers use…

0

20

40

60

80

Sw

eden

Den

mar

k

Kor

ea

Nor

way

Finl

and

Sw

itzer

land

Fran

ce

Bel

gium

(Fl.)

Hun

gary

Italy

Spa

in

Mex

ico

Por

tuga

l

Irela

nd

Net

herla

nds1

% of students in schools where...

teachers use computer applicationsteachers use e-mail

2727 Teacher participation in professional development activities

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Hun

gary

Fra

nce

Italy

Por

tuga

l

Kor

ea

Spa

in

Irel

and

Mex

ico

Bel

gium

(F

l.)

Sw

itzer

land

Nor

way

Fin

land

Den

mar

k

Sw

eden

Net

herla

nds

1

Percentage of teachers...

...in professional development activities (other than ICT-related)… in ICT-related professional development activities

2828 Teacher-related obstacles to reaching ICT goals in upper secondary education (2001)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Sw

eden

Den

mar

k

Kor

ea

Fin

land

Nor

way

Sw

itzer

land

Fra

nce

Bel

gium

(F

l.)

Italy

Hun

gary

Spa

in

Por

tuga

l

Mex

ico

Irel

and

Net

herla

nds

2

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percentage of teachers using computer applicationsInsufficient time for teachers to prepare lessons in which computers are usedLack of interest / willingness of teachers to use computers Teachers' lack of knowledge / skills in using computers for instructional purposes

2929 Conclusions To make effective use of computers in

schools The ‘consumers’ of continuing education

are raised in national school systems. A robust and sustainable technological

environment is needed in schools to make teachers professionally interested users of ICT.

The digital divide can aggravate social exclusion.

High quality educational software must be affordable for schools.

Can language barriers be overcome?

3030 The OECD Survey of Upper Secondary Schools

When will the data be published? Publication: Integration,

Cooperation, Support Data release: 15 July, 2003 Printed publication: November,

2003