The state of Education

collection

topic

title of document

issued by

date publisehd

frequency

for further details

ActivitiesCosts

tsluseR International Comparisons

5 0835000 PPED8805-2511 NSSI

Legal deposit4th quarter 2008

978-2-11-095435-0 NBSI No 18 – October 2008

30 French education system indicators

The state of Education

The French education system

The state of Education : 30 French education system indicators

DEPP/Development and publications Department

October 2008

Annual

www.education.gouv.fr

The

stat

e of

Educ

atio

n No

18 [O

ctob

er 2

008]


Primary education

Overall

Secondary education

ISBN 978-2-11-095435-0

9 7 8 2 1 1 0 9 5 4 3 5 0


Continuing education

This work is published byLe ministère de l’Education nationale et le ministère de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la RechercheDirection de l’évaluation,de la prospectiveet de la performance61-65, rue Dutot75732 Paris Cedex 15

Executive EditorDaniel Vitry

EditorPaul Esquieu

Assistant Editor’s Office DEPP/Département de la valorisation et de l’édition (Development and Publications Department)Marie Zilberman

AuthorsDominique AbriacGinette BournyGérard BrézillonAgnès BrunChantal BrutelMarc ColmantSéverine Dos SantosSébastien DurierJérôme FabreMichèle JacquotMartine JeljoulFlorence Léger

Bruno LutinierClaude Malègueélodie LeprévostDelphine PerelmuterPascale PolletPascale Poulet-CoulibandoDanièle ProuteauThierry RocherAlexia Stéfanou

DEPP/DVE LayoutSolange GuégeaisPrinted by DEPP/DVEDEPP/DVE SalesEvelyne Deslandes61-65, rue Dutot75735 Paris CedexTranslationProvence Traduction

The State of Education

The indicators published in The State of Education every year help us perform the necessary task of evaluating our education system. The publication provides us with the latest data on its main characteristics.

It highlights the significant progress made since the 1960s, reflected in the growing percentage of young people entering lycées and going on to higher education, thereby contributing to the overall improvement in the standard of education and qualification of the French population.

This evaluation, however, also points to the difficulties schools are encountering in their efforts to modernise to meet our fellow citizens’ legitimate demand for a fairer, more efficient education system.

Two observations in particular call for new ambitions and paths to progress to be defined. The conclusions of two international surveys (PIRLS and PISA) published at the end of 2007 give considerable cause for concern regarding the state of our education system. They show that the performance of French pupils aged 10 or 15 years is only average, if not poor, compared with those from other countries. Secondly, some 15% of French pupils leave primary school with serious deficiencies in their reading, writing and arithmetic abilities.

These pupils are clearly exposed to the risk of a disorganised school career, lack of qualifications and, consequently, difficulties in finding their place in society.

As part of an effort to combat academic failure and social determinism and ensure that each school student has the tools to succeed, I have embarked upon a series of major reforms. These are aimed at improving the performance of primary schools, providing students in collèges with special coaching after school, on a voluntary basis, and helping those lycée students in the greatest difficulty to find their way and make the right choices in their school career.

Evaluation must now be put to work to help our education system achieve its new ambitions as part of a constant and focused effort. I am sure this publication will help do just that!

Xavier Darcos

Preface

IntroductionThe growing number of international indicators and comparative studies (OECD, EUROSTAT, UNESCO), the definition of joint objectives for European education systems, the implementation and aims of the Constitutional bylaw on budget acts (LOLF) in France and the declared ambition that all young people should master a common core of knowledge and skills all point to the need for regular monitoring of efforts made in education and training, their outcomes and the progress still to be made.

From its very first edition in 1991, the State of Education (l’état de l’École in French) has brought together for analysis a number of indicators to highlight changes over time as well as geographical differences (half the indicators used shed light on the international situation). The indicators reflect the resources available to our education system, its activities, its mode of operation and its internal and external outcomes.

With its 30 indicators, this 18th edition continues along this road, with a special emphasis on certain crucial issues such as success at school and equal opportunities in terms of access to education, diplomas and qualifications, which now weigh so heavily on young people’s chances of finding a job. It is based on an information system, comprising several renewed or expanded sources:

- the Compte de l’Éducation (Education account) which, using the Government’s new budgetary and accounting rules, aims to provide a clearer view of the total expenditure devoted to various levels of education and training by the Govern-ment, local authorities, businesses and households in France and its overseas départements;

- national and international evaluations of students’ prior learning (national evaluations at the end of primary school and collège to assess students’ achievements in various subjects and their command of basic skills in French and maths; inter-national surveys: PISA, the OECD survey of 15-year-old school students and PIRL, the IEA’s survey of children in Year 5).

Resources available to our education system

In 2007, France devoted a budget of 125.3 billion euros to its education system as a whole (including the overseas dé-partements). This is 6.6% of the gross domestic product (GDP) and represents 1,970 euros per capita or 7,470 euros per school student. Continuing education apart, this effort puts us above the average for OECD countries (6.0% compared with 5.8% in 2005).

The share of the national wealth spent on education rose significantly in the early 1990s, reaching 7.6% in 1993, up from 6.4% in 1980. Since then, there has been a slow but steady downward trend; although the amount spent on education has continued to rise, it has not matched the growth in the nation’s wealth (indicator 01).

Since 1980, education spending has seen an 85% increase in inflation-adjusted terms, growing at the same average annual rate as GDP (2.2%). This has less to do with the increasing number of young people at primary and secondary schools than an increased cost per student. Considering all years together, the unit cost has increased by 73% since 1980. This is due in part to the development of relatively more costly upper secondary and higher education teaching but, more especially, to the improved facilities available for school students and better pay and career conditions for teachers.

During this period, the average annual costs per primary school pupil and secondary school student have risen more sharply (+79% and +63% respectively) than that of a student in higher education (+36%).

In primary education, stability in the number of teachers, combined with a drop in the number of schoolchildren, led to a si-gnificant improvement in the student-to-teacher ratio at the beginning of the academic year in 2002 (indicator 18). Although secondary education has not experienced the same process, it enjoys better resources than other comparable countries. The high student-to-teacher ratios that typify French secondary education (average ratio of 11.9 students per teacher in 2006), amplified by the current downward trend in population growth, stem from the fact that many teaching hours (a third on average and a half in lycées) are spent with small groups of students rather than a whole class (indicator 23).

While it is true that higher education has accounted for a rising share of education spending since 1980 (indicator 29), this is primarily due to growing numbers of students and not to unit costs, where the increase is far slower than that obser-ved in school education. Efforts in favour of higher education have been stepped up, however, and in 2007, spending per student rose further above the average observed for a secondary school student (10,150 euros compared with 8,870), al-though a university student still «costs less» than a lycée student (nearly 9,000 euros compared with more than 10,000).

Central government is responsible for the greatest share of education spending, contributing to 61% of the budget in 2007 – with a 55% share for the Ministry of Education. The ministry’s budget primarily pays the salaries of teaching staff, whose numbers and, more particularly, structural organisation, have undergone considerable change. For example, 94% of state primary school teachers now have professeur des écoles status, while 75% of secondary school teachers have passed the agrégation or CAPES (indicators 02 and 03). Local authorities bore 22.8% of «initial» education costs in 2007, compared with 14% in 1980. With each new wave of decentralisation, their share continues to rise. It now exceeds 40% for primary education, where municipalities must pay the salaries of non-teaching staff as well as the running and investment costs of schools.

Considerable progress up to the mid-1990s

For three decades, the French education system grew considerably in quantitative terms. This was due to a number of factors, including the nursery school boom and generalised access to secondary education in the 1960s and 70s, as well as the massive influx of students from lower to upper secondary education as of the mid-1980s to study for the baccalau-réat school leaving certificate (academic, technological or vocational) before going on to higher education institutions.

The school career of the generation currently passing through or having just left the French education system can be summed up as follows:

- almost all students now reach the end of collège and 70% reach their baccalauréat year (indicator 24),

- 64% pass their baccalauréat (indicator 27),

- slightly more than half go on to higher education and 42% obtain a diploma (indicator 09).

but

- nearly 6% of young people (about 45,000 in each generation) complete their initial secondary education with no qualifica-tion. In terms of the French classification of training levels, this means they have neither reached CAP or BEP level (voca-tional training certificates) nor entered a general or technological lycée. They are among the 18% of young people (about 130,000 in each generation) who finish school with no upper secondary school diploma (CAP, BEP or baccalauréat).

� I 7 The State of Education No. 18 [2008 edition]

Although the target, announced in the 1980s, of guaranteeing that 80% of a generation in Year 13 would reach baccalau-réat level was not achieved, there was a spectacular rise of more than 30% in the number of students reaching this level in just a decade: from less than 40% to 70% in 1995.

The system allowed younger generations to reach significantly higher levels of education than those reached by previous generations. A comparison of younger and older generations in terms of the number of diplomas obtained (indicator 09) shows that France has more than caught up with the other developed countries. This is true with regard to upper secon-dary diplomas, which the European Union and other international organisations consider as the minimum qualification threshold. In 2006, more than 80% of 25- to 34-year-olds in France say they have passed a CAP, BEP or baccalauréat diploma, compared with only 50% of 55- to 64-year olds (indicator 10).

There is no doubt that the successive waves of progress in schooling have promoted a more democratic education system in the country. Secondary education has gradually opened its doors to everyone, beginning with the collèges in the 1960s, then the lycées up to the end of the 1980s. Half the young people born into working-class families between 1980 and 1984 passed their baccalauréat and were often the first to do so in their family. This figure stood at barely 10% among those born in the 1950s (indicator 11).

Over the last decade, however, no such progress has been observed. The uninterrupted increase in the length of studies has come to a halt. The total length of time spent in schooling, from nursery school to the end of higher education has levelled out at around 19 years (indicator 04). Almost all generations now get to the end of lower secondary education but, following the considerable popularity of general studies observed at the end of the 1980s, lower secondary students have now begun to opt more for vocational courses – particularly in agriculture – and apprenticeships (indicator 22). There is no more progress in the proportion of young people reaching baccalauréat level, which remains in the region of 70%, inclu-ding 6% from outside the state education system (indicator 24). Among students who pass their baccalauréat, and whose proportion in a generation only varies in terms of the pass rate, only a little more than half had chosen general options. Their relative weight has dropped in favour of students choosing vocational baccalauréat options and who are not likely to continue their studies. Under these conditions, enrolment rates have dropped somewhat since the beginning of the new millennium, at least among those in the 19 to 24-year age group (indicator 04).

Persistent difficulties and disparities in mastering basic skills

Progress in schooling and the provision of ever higher levels of education to new categories of students have not alto-gether wiped out disparities in terms of prior learning and educational achievement. A regular, national and international system for observing and evaluating students is now available for making sure that the education system, as part of its prime task of passing on knowledge, enables every student to master fully an essential core of knowledge and skills at the end of his or her compulsory schooling.

The evaluations made at the end of primary and lower secondary school since 2003 have confirmed significant disparities every year in the performance of young people at school. In 2003, this observation was made for written and oral com-prehension, in 2004 for foreign languages, in 2006 for history and geography and in 2007 for experimental science. In 2003, the French language skills of 15% of Year 6 pupils were not up to the standard required to enter lower secondary school

(collège). In 2007, the same proportion of pupils had difficulties in experimental science (indicators 19 and 25). In order to gauge performance in school teaching against the common core of knowledge and skills, a system was set up as of 2007 to record the percentage of students who had mastered core skills in French and mathematics at the end of primary school and collège. This proportion varies from 80% to 90% according to educational level and subject (indicator 16). Also, the results of tests taken by all young people aged 17 years and over attending the journée d’appel de préparation à la défense (JAPD) (national defence information day) show that 12% had difficulties in reading comprehension in 2007, compared with 11% in 2003, although this increase is not really significant (indicator 08).

These observations give cause for concern and are confirmed by international surveys (PIRLS and PISA), which indicate that, contrary to one of the Lisbon objectives (indicator 15), the proportion of pupils and young people experiencing rea-ding difficulties shows no sign of relenting and, in fact, has even tended to increase in recent years. Every three years, PISA provides results in written comprehension, mathematical literacy and scientific literacy in students aged 15 from a growing number of countries (57 in 2006). According to these results, the proportion of young French people who can be considered as «poor readers» rose from 15.2 to 21.8% between 2000 and 2006. Furthermore, the proportion of young people in the greatest difficulty, classed as «very poor readers», has doubled over the same period, rising from 4.2 to 8.5% (compared with an OECD average of 6.0 and 7.4%).

The PIRLS study sets out to assess the reading skills of Year 5 pupils. Its results for 2006 also show that while France is above average among the 45 countries that took part in the study, it is below average when compared with OECD or European Union Member States alone. This is confirmed by the fact that 32% of young French pupils are among the 25% of European pupils with the lowest scores (indicator 20).

This document also provides some useful data for appraising the knowledge and skills of students in the scientific fields: in experimental science for national evaluations and in «scientific literacy» for PISA, of which it was the focus in 2006 (in-dicator 26). While the international assessment shows that French students are close to the OECD average, it also shows that their results vary. They are more at ease with scientific reasoning and reproducing knowledge and have greater difficulties applying what they know to everyday situations.

...which often appear very early...

Difficulties at school observed at the end of primary school or collège often appear from the very first years of school, frequently resulting in the pupil being made to repeat a year. These difficulties are seldom overcome and weigh heavily on a student’s later years at school. Lagging students, who have had to repeat years in the past, stand out from the others through their systematically poorer prior learning. Thus, considering the proportion of young people mastering core skills, a difference of around 20 points was observed in mathematics between lagging students and those who were not behind in March 2008. In Year 6 or in Year 10, the difference observed in French reached, or even exceeded, 25 points, which obviously begs the question as to whether making students repeat a year is the best answer (indicator 16).

Prior learning and school careers also vary with social background. The children of managerial staff routinely achieve higher average scores in national assessments than children from working-class families. And if they encounter any difficulties during primary school, children from more advantaged social backgrounds more often manage «to turn things

� I 9 The State of Education No. 18 [2008 edition]

round» than working-class children, who not only come up against difficulties more often, but also overcome them more rarely. In schools belonging to the priority education scheme, especially those in the «ambition réussite» (ambition suc-cess) networks, which work with a particularly fragile or disadvantaged school population, the proportion of Year 6 pupils who master core skills is 15 to 20 points lower than elsewhere. The gap is even wider by the end of Year 10 (indicator 05).

...and weigh heavily on young people’s future school and professional careers.

The data available from national evaluations and regular student monitoring operations (1989 and 1995 panels) show how crucial school results are for young people’s guidance and subsequent chances of success.

Thus, children entering Year 7 in 1995 and who were among the 25% of pupils with the poorest assessment results faced a much higher risk of failing their lower secondary education and leaving collège with no qualifications (indicator 09 of edition No.14).

At the end of collège, assessments have confirmed over the past few years that students who request (and obtain) a place in a general and technology class in Year 11 fare much better than the others on the competency scales (indicator 25).

Again, there is a strong social element in these disparities in success rates. Children from more comfortable social bac-kgrounds benefit in particular from their higher standards of prior learning and from well targeted options, allowing them to follow courses that give them the best possible chances of social and professional success in the future. After collège, they favour the more general courses in the lycée and at the baccalauréat and are particularly over-represented in the «S» section, while children from working-class backgrounds tend to turn more towards technology and professional options. Baccalauréat pass rates are higher among students (indicator 27) whose parents occupy managerial positions, while in the 20- to 24-year age group, by far the greatest number of people leaving school with no diploma or only the brevet (lower secondary school certificate) are from working-class backgrounds (indicator 11).

Gender-related differences –albeit of another type – can also be observed in school careers and academic success. More girls than boys complete their initial education with a diploma in their hands (indicators 9 and 14), drawing on their higher level of prior learning in French (indicator 16). While more girls pass their baccalauréat and go on to further education, they continue to favour the arts and services, leaving the boys to dominate in the more profitable and highly selective scientific and industrial courses.

Our system of education must tackle the problems of students in difficulty as early as possible, for it is these students who will end up with the poorest qualifications and who will have particular trouble entering the job market.

For this reason, academic failure is now addressed systematically right from primary school. To this end, provision has been made for two hours per week of remedial classes for students in difficulty and free courses during the school holi-days to bring Year 5 and Year 6 students up to the required standard.

The education system must also help students make the best choices for their future. It must give them the information they need and guide them to courses and options that not only match their ambitions and capacities but also give them the best opportunities for finding employment later on. First and foremost, these measures concern young people leaving school with no qualification. Although their numbers are dropping, they have been the hardest hit by rising unemployment

Equivalence of school years

French system English system(used in this document)

American system Explanation

CM1 Year 5 Fourth Grade Penultimate year of primary schoolCM2 Year 6 Fifth Grade Last year of primary schoolSixième Year 7 Sixth Grade First year of lower secondary schoolPremière Year 12 Eleventh Grade Penultimate year of upper secondary schoolTerminale Year 13 Twelfth Grade Final year of upper secondary school

since the 1970s. Their situation has given particular cause for concern in recent years, with the unemployment rate ex-ceeding 40% among the working population aged 15 to 24 years (indicators 12, 28). These issues also concern students in higher education, whose academic careers, performance and professional future are described in The State of Higher Education and Research, just as The State of Education does for primary and secondary school students.

New topics are shown in white

10 I 11 The State of Education No. 18 [2008 edition]

Contents

01 p. 12 Education expenditure

02 p. 14 Ministry of Education staff

03 p. 16 Ministry of Education staff profiles

04 p. 18 Duration of schooling

05 p. 20 Priority education

06 p. 22 Education with apprenticeship

07 p. 24 Social subsidies for collège and lycée pupils

08 p. 26 Young people’s reading skills

09 p. 28 Level of qualification

10 p. 30 School-leaving at low levels of education

11 p. 32 Level of education according to social category

12 p. 34 Qualification and risk of unemployment

13 p. 36 Diploma, social status and salary

14 p. 38 The education of boys and girls

15 p. 40 Europe’s Lisbon objectives

16 p. 42 Basic skills at the end of primary and lower secondary education

17 p. 44 Expenditure on primary education

18 p. 46 Education and enrolment conditions in primary education

19 p. 48 Skills acquired in experimental sciences by the end of primary education

20 p. 50 PIRLS 200�: reading skills of pupils in CM1 (Year 5)

Costs

Activities

Results

Overall Primery education

Secondary education Higher education Continuing education21 p. 52 Expenditure on secondary

education

22 p. 54 Enrolment in secondary education

23 p. 56 School conditions in secondary education

24 p. 58 Access to education levels IV and V

25 p. 60 Skills acquired in experimental sciences by the end of lower secondary education

26 p. 62 PISA 200�: scientific skills of 15-year-old pupils

27 p. 64 Baccalauréat success rates

28 p. 66 Employment and professional careers of secondary school graduates

29 p. 68 Expenditure on higher education 30 p. 70 Continuing education

01

In 2007, domestic expenditure on education (DEE) reached 125.3 billion euros i.e. 6.6% of national

wealth (GDP). The national community as a whole made a considerable effort to finance education with 1,970 euros per capita, or 7,470 per pupil or student.

International comparisons relate the expenditures dedicated to initial education only (excluding conti-nuing education) to their national GDPs. With a share of more than 6.0% in 2005, France remains above the average in OECD countries, below the United States and Sweden but significantly above Spain, Italy or Japan.

Between 1980 and 2007, the average growth of ex-penditure on education was on a par with the in-crease in national wealth (i.e. 2.2% per year) but its share in GDP varied. In the ‘80s, it increased from 6.4% to 6.8% in 1982 before falling back to 6.4% in 1989. This period corresponds to the implementation of decentralisation laws: Government capital expen-diture was transferred to departments and regions who only initiated significant reconstruction and rehabilitation of collèges and lycées (lower and up-per secondary schools) from 1989 on. After 1989, the percentage of GDP devolved to DEE showed a signi-ficant rise to 7.6% in 1993-1997, mainly due to a major effort on the part of regional authorities in addition to an increase in teachers’ salaries. Between 1998 and 2007 however, GDP rose to 21.8% as against a mere 7.5% for DEE whose share in national wealth showed a regular decline back to 6.6% in 2007.

DEE growth is due less to increased numbers of stu-dents than to an increase in the cost per student, ta-king into consideration all levels, which rose by 2.0% per year at constant prices over the 1980-2007 pe-riod (taking into account breaks in series occurring in 1999 and 2006). This increase is due to a number of factors: increased impact of upper secondary and higher education, improvement in primary education student-to-teacher ratios, reassessment of teachers’ status.

If average expenditure per pupil in primary and se-condary education increased significantly (79% and 63% respectively), average expenditure per student in higher education increased by a mere 35% since the considerable growth in numbers up until 1996, and then between 2000 and 2003, absorbed the grea-ter part of the increased funds dedicated to higher education.

Three quarters of expenditure was paid out in staff costs, borne mostly by the State as the major source of funds for expenditure on education, as much as 61.2% in 2007, 55.0% of which went to the Ministry of Educa-tion. The regional authorities funded 22.8% of the total initial amount. Their share increased further in secon-dary and higher education as from 2006, mainly due to the transfer of secondary-education TOS (technical, labour and service) staff and delegation to the regions of new responsibilities in higher education health- and social-sector training schemes. As for households, their contribution amounted to 8%.

Since 19�0, domestic expenditure on education has been multiplied by 1.� and in 2007, it represented �.�% of the GDP i.e.:- 125.3 billion euros,- 7,470 euros per pupil or student,- 1,970 euros per capita.

Domestic expenditure on education includes all spending by economic agents, regional and central public administrations, companies and households contributing to education activities: teaching and extracurricular activities of all kinds, activities related to organising the educational system (general administration, guidance, teaching documents and research in education), activities supporting school attendance (canteens and boarding facilities, school medical services, transport) and expenses required by the schools (supplies, books, clothing).This expenditure is assessed each year by the Compte de l’éducation (Education Account), a satellite account of the Comptabilité nationale (National Accounts). In 1999, these accounts were restructured; three major changes were introduced:- DOM (overseas departments) were included- social contributions linked to staff salaries were reassessed- household expenses were reassessed.

As from 2006, the constitutional bylaw on budget acts (LOLF) modified State budgetary and accounting rules particularly concerning improved evaluation of the social contributions charged to civil servant salaries.Initial funding: funding before transfers between the various economic players are taken into account. It thus represents the real costs borne by each actor.Final funding: concept enabling the study of the relationship between the final funding entity and either the producer or the educational activity.

Source: MEN-MESR-DEPP.For international comparisons: OECDCoverage: Metropolitan France + DOM (overseas departments)


01education expenditure

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5%

50

75

100

125

150DEE in 2007 pricesPercentage of DEE in GDP

in billion of euros

02 Evolution in domestic expenditure on education (DEE) and its share in GDP (1980-2007)

Source: MEN-MESR-DEPP

1980 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 07

01 Education expenditure Metropolitan France + DOM

19�0 1990 2000 200� 2007

Domestic expenditure on education*in current prices (billions of euros) 28.5 68.0 104.9 122.1 125.3 in 2007 prices (billions of euros) 67.9 90.4 121.5 125.1 125.3 DEE/GDP in % 6.4 6.6 7.3 6.8 �.� DEE/per capita in 2007 prices (euros) 1.260 1.555 2.000 1.980 1.970

Average expenditure per student*in current prices (billions of euros) 1,760 4,030 6,200 7,290 7,470

in 2007 prices (euros) 4,200 5,350 7,170 7,470 7,470

Structure of initial funding (in %) **State 69.1 63.6 65.2 62.6 �1.2

of which MEN 60.9 56.5 57.4 56.5 55.0

Regional authorities 14.2 18.5 19.9 21.3 22.�Other public administrations and CAF 0.4 0.7 2.1 1.8 1.�Companie 5.5 5.9 5.4 6.5 �.5Households 10.8 11.2 7.4 7.8 7.7

(*) The reassessment of the DEE (see methodology opposite) applies to the whole of the 1980-2007 period.Average expenditures per pupil were reassessed only after 1999.(**) Initial funding: see opposite for methodology.Source: MEN-MESR-DEPP Source: MEN-MESR-DEPP

Interpretation: this graph shows two breaks in series: in 1999, a break due to the restructuring of the Education Accounts (Metropolitan France + DOM); in 2006, a break due to modifications in the State’s budgetary and accounting rules (LOLF).

Primary education Secondary education

Higher educationAverage expenditure/pupil

03 Evolution in average expenditure per pupil in 2007 prices (1980-2007)

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

€11,000

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007

7,080

5,560

2,780

4,200

10,150

8,870

7,470

5,350

0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Source: OECD, 2008 edition of Education at a glance

Education expenditure (initial education) in relation to GDP (2005)

United StatesSweden

United KingdomFrance

FinlandAverage for OECD countries

AustraliaGermany

NetherlandsJapan

ItalySpain

02


In January 2008, 1,009,061 individuals were salaried by the Ministry of Education using State funds:

870,023 were teachers in the public sector and the private sector under State contract and 139,038 were responsible for administrative, technical, manage-ment, educational, guidance and supervision tasks or educational assistance. There were also 61,393 educational and teaching assistants working in schools (table 01). Staff from other Ministries (Agri-culture, Defence, Health) and private organisations contributing to the education of some 13 million pu-pils should be added to this number.

Women made up two thirds of this staff: they were more numerous in the private (73.8%) than the public education sector (67.9%) and in primary (91% in the private and 81% in the public sectors) than in upper secondary education (65.6% and 57.4% respectively).

In January 2008, the proportion of teachers accounts for more than 86% of staff in general, resulting from the transfer to regional authorities of responsibility for some of the technical staff in schools consis-ting of manual workers, maintenance and reception staff.

In schools, academic services and central adminis-tration, other employees are responsible for mana-gement, inspection, educational and supervision tasks and educational assistance alongside tea-chers. Among these are school Heads, Chief Educa-tion Advisors, Guidance Counsellor/Psychologists,

librarians or administrative, technical and supervi-sion staff in addition to health and social workers. These employees are grouped with the 58,125 edu-cational and 3,268 teaching assistants who are part of the programme vie de l’élève (School Life pro-gramme) (table 02).

The fall in staff numbers over the past few years only concerns secondary education. It is related to the growing decline in pupil numbers (graph 03).

In January 200�, the Ministry of Education was paying out salaries to 1,009,0�1 individuals* of whom ��5,�21 were working in the public sector and 143,440 in the private sector under State contract. ��.2% of these individuals were teachers.

* The staff listed concerns those still working who are remunerated by the Ministry of Education (positions and funds coming under school education budgets). Staff remunerated using resources specific to private institutions not under State contract are not taken into account. Neither are employees coming under the responsibility of the Ministry of Higher Education and Research or of “Youth Affairs and Sport”.

Source: January 2008 processing based on data supplied by the POLCA infocentre using the central administration staff payslips and pay database.Coverage: Metropolitan France + DOM, public and private-under-contract sectors for teachers, public for other staff (ATOSS and management staff in the private-under-contract sector are remunerated through a forfait d’externat (external contract) system).

02Ministry of Education staff01 Evolution in Ministry of Education staff numbers

Metropolitan France + DOM, public and private sectors

Teachers*

Administrative, technical, management, supervision Total

Proportion of teachers (%)

Auxiliary educators and educational assistants **Public Private Total

2000 734,977 139,650 874,627 249,762 1,124,3�9 77.8% 61,470

2001 739,792 140,290 880,082 252,833 1,132,915 77.7% 62,320

2002 746,218 142,065 888,283 255,113 1,143,39� 77.7% 60,430

2003 750,005 144,169 894,174 257,302 1,151,47� 77.7% 55,770

2004 748,644 145,394 894,038 248,755 1,142,793 78.2% 50,190

2005 742,621 144,940 887,561 238,262 1,125,�23 78.8% 51,287

200� 739,112 144,909 884,021 228,786 1,112,�07 79.4% 58,197

2007 734,446 144,501 878,947 170,915 1,049,��2 83.7% 60,635

200� 726,583 143,440 870,023 139,038 1,009,0�1 86.2% 61,393

* Teachers in primary and secondary education, both public and private** In 2008, 3,268 teaching assistants and 58,125 educational assistantsSource: MEN-DEPP

02 Distribution of Ministry of Education staff in January 200�public and private

Category of staff Numbers

Public primary school teaching staff 322,357

Private-sector primary school teaching staff 46,379

Public secondary education teaching staff 404,226

Private-sector secondary education teaching staff 97,061

Teachers (appointees and supply) �70,023

Administrative, technical, management and supervision staff 139,038

Auxiliary educators and educational assistants 61,393

Total 1,070,454Source: MEN-DEPP

91

94

97

100

103

106

109

Teachers

Students

Primary education

Primary education

Secondary education

Secondary education

03 Evolution in numbers of pupils and teachers (1995-2007) using 1995 base index=100

Metropolitan France + DOM, public and private

1995-1996

1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

Source: MEN-DEPP

03

1� I 17 The State of Education No. 18 [2008 edition]

In January 2008, there were 322,357 teachers in public-sector primary education. The vast majo-

rity were professeurs des écoles (primary school teachers) (94.2%). Among the 46,379 professeurs des écoles in the private sector under contract, 84.8% were remunerated on a scale equivalent to that of qualified primary school teachers.

Teachers in public-sector secondary education (including post-baccalauréat classes) numbered 404,226 in January 2008. More than six out of ten tea-chers (62.8%) were fully qualified or equivalent, more than one out of ten were holders of the aggregation, the highest teaching qualification in France (11.9% and 0.6% had corps de chaire supérieure or “Senior Chair” status); 15.6% were teachers in vocational training schools (TVTS). Teachers with the PEGC qualification (lower secondary school teachers), teaching and educational auxiliaries, who are no longer recruited, represented 3.1% of teachers as-signed to secondary education and 2.3% belonged to the primary education teaching body. There were 97,061 teachers working in private-sector schools under contract of whom 58.2% were remunerated on the fully-qualified or equivalent scale and 10.4% were TVTS or education auxiliaries.

Administrative, technical, educational, management, guidance, supervision and educational assistance staff were remunerated through one or other of the primary or secondary education programmes (42.5%), programme vie de l’élève (School Life) (35.8%) or the

remedial programme in the case of academic ser-vice and central administration departments.

The age pyramid for public-sector teachers shows their relative youth in primary education where more than one out of three teachers falls into the 29-38 age group. The very high proportion of women is even more pronounced among the younger generations under 30, where it reaches 85%.

In secondary education, distribution by age highlights two peaks: a third of teachers are aged between 32 and 42 and 25% fall into the 52 – 59 age group. Among the under-30s, the proportion of women is over 60%.

Among the �70,000 teachers salaried by the Ministry of Education, �3.5% work in the public sector: the majority are women, especially in primary education and among the younger teachers. 139,03� people perform administrative, technical, management, supervisory and educational assistance tasks.

* Source: January 2008 processing based on data supplied by the POLCA infocentre using the central administration staff payslips and pay database.Coverage: Metropolitan France + DOM, public and private sector under contract.

* The staff listed concerns those still working who are remunerated by the Ministry of Education (positions and funds coming under school education budgets). Staff remunerated using resources specific to private institutions not under State contract are not taken into account. Neither are employees coming under the responsibility of the Ministry of Higher Education and Research or of “Youth Affairs and Sport”.

03staff profiles01 Public-sector teachers

Primary NumbersProportion of women

Proportion of professeurs des écoles

1995 314,217 76.1 19.3

2000 314,729 77.8 46.0

2005 318,236 79.7 79.7

2006 320,103 80.3 85.8

2007 321,339 80.7 90.8

2008 322,357 81.0 94.2

Secondary education Numbers

Proportion of women

Proportion of agrégation holders

and qualified teachers

1995 395,824 56.0 55.6

2000 420,248 56.7 68.6

2005 424,385 57.0 73.3

2006 419,009 57.2 74.4

2007 413 107 57.3 75.0

2008 404,226 57.4 75.3Source: MEN-DEPP

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000

public-sector secondary school teachers 2008

03 Distribution by age and gender of publc-sector primary school teachers 2008

age

MenWomen

0

0

21

24

27

30

33

36

39

42

45

48

51

54

57

60

63

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,00020

23

26

29

32

35

38

41

44

47

50

53

56

59

62

65

Source: MEN-DEPP

02 Distribution per section of inspection, management, administrative, educational, guidance, supervision and educational assistance staff – 200�

Numbers %

“Primary school education” programme 1,798 1.3

“Secondary education” programme 60,995 43.9

Programme vie de l’élève (School Life programme) 49,725 35.8

“Remedial” * programme 23,140 16.6

Central administration 3,380 2.4

Total 139,03� 100.0

* “Remedial” programme non-inclusive of central administration staffSource: MEN-DEPP

04


The enrolment rates by age group observed in 2006-2007 indicate that a child beginning nur-

sery school at that time could expect to complete 18.7 years of initial education, 2.7 of which would be in higher education (table 1). After continuously rising until the mid-‘90s, resulting in an increase of almost two years, school life expectancy fell slightly between 1997 and 2001 and then stabilised after 2002. In 2006, school expectancy once again decli-ned to some extent in all types of education except apprenticeship. The drop was observed in all above-18 age groups. It was particularly visible among the 20-22 age groups in higher education (a fall of about one point in en-rolment rates).

In the 23-24 age groups, enrolment has declined once again this year, especially among young men. The young people of the generations in question entered education through apprenticeship after completing Year 10 far more often than previous generations which explains the lower enrolment rate. Above the age of 25, the upward trend in growth rates observed in 2000 came to an end in 2005 (graph 2).

However, schooling in France remains significant. Thus, the period of “universal schooling”, i.e. the number of years during which at least 90% of young people attend school, is 15 years in France as against 16 in Belgium but only 13 in Italy, 12 in the United Kin-gdom and 11 in the United States.

The time a pupil spends at school depends primarily on the type of education chosen (general, technolo-

gical or vocational) but also the rate at which it is ac-complished. Given the drop in repeat years observed over the past few years (graph 3), the younger gene-rations complete secondary education in the same proportions as their seniors (indicator 24) but they do so more rapidly or at a younger age. The continuous drop in enrolment rates at the age of 18 is a result of this phenomenon.

After gradually rising from the ‘�0s to the mid-‘90s, school life expectancy stabilised at around nineteen years.

Source: MEN-DEPP, INSEECoverage: Metropolitan France, inclusive of all education programmes

School life expectancy is an estimate of the length of time a child beginning pre-primary school in a given year will spend in education. As with life expectancy, this indicator shows a specific situation at a given time, an image of schooling in the academic year under consideration. Mathematically, school expectancy is the sum of enrolment rates observed at different ages, thus, an enrolment rate of 80% gives 0.8 years duration of schooling. As all enrolment rates from 6-14 years amount to 100% allowing for a margin of error, to obtain a valid appreciation of changes in the duration of schooling, a distinction should be made between school life expectancy before the age of 6 and after 14.

04duration of schooling 01 Evolution in duration of schooling

in years

19�5-19�� 1990-1991 1995-199� 2000-2001 2005-200� 200�-2007

Total 17.1 1�.1 19.0 1�.9 1�.� 1�.7

Before age of 6 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.2 3.2

After age of 14 4.9 5.8 6.7 6.5 6.6 6.5

- girls 5.0 5.9 6.8 6.7 6.8 6.7

- boys 4.8 5.7 6.5 6.3 6.3 6.2

of which higher education 1.5 1.9 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.7

Source: MEN (school going population), INSEE (number of inhabitants)

Source: MEN (school going population) and INSEE (number of inhabitants estimate)

02 Enrolment rate according to age and gender (1985-2006)

Total aged 18

total 25-29 yrs.

19 and 20-yr. old girls

19 and 20-yr. old boys





Coverage: population enrolled in all educational institutions and apprentice training centres.

1985-1986

1987-1988

1989-1990

1991-1992

19931994

19951996

19971998

19992000

2001-2002

2003-2004

2005-2006

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90%

Source: MEN-DEPP

03 Evolution in repeat years... ... lower secondary education

Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10

0

5

10

15

20

25%

1985 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 2007

0

5

10

15

20

25%

1985 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 2007

... higher secondary education

Year 11 Year 12 Year 13


* both full- and part-time in public and private-sector institutions

Duration of universal schooling (2006)Number of years during which more than 90% of the population is enrolled in school*

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16Belgium

FranceSpainJapan

GermanySwedenFinland

ItalyNetherlands

United KingdomAustralia

United States

05


A t the beginning of the 2007 academic year, 253 collèges (lower secondary schools) were

network leaders in the “ambition-réussite” or “am-bition success” programme (AR). The other collè-ges in priority education areas were part of educa-tional success networks (RRS).

Thus, around 123,000 lower secondary-school pupils i.e. one out of twenty, attended an AR and 401,000 an RRS school. As could be expected, the vast majority of these pupils were from underprivi-leged backgrounds: the parents of 75% of pupils in AR collèges in Metropolitan France and overseas departments (DOM) plus 57% of those in educatio-nal success collèges were working class or inacti-ve as against 35% in public-sector schools outside priority education areas. Many of them had fallen well behind: 31.5% in AR and 24% in RRS schools lagged behind when entering Year 7 compared to 14.5% elsewhere (table 1).

At the end of Year 6, as at the end of Year 10, AR pupils are less proficient in basic skills in both French and mathematics than other pupils. For ins-tance, while 71.4% of Year 6 pupils in AR schools mastered basic skills in French in March 2008, the proportion was 77.1% in RRS schools and 89.9% el-sewhere (graph 03).

The national brevet diploma (DNB or ISCED 2 cer-tificate) is comprised of three written exams (French, Maths and History - Geography - Civics).

In the 2007 session, 60.7% of AR school pupils and 46.7% of RRS pupils scored less than 10 out of 20 in the written exams as opposed to 30% elsewhere. However, these gaps are narrowed if continuous assessment is taken into consideration: 66.7% of pupils in AR schools and 72.8% of RRS pupils were awarded their DNB compared to 81.9% elsewhere (graph 02).

Such divergences are largely due to differences in social background and should not produce a negative response to priority education policy. The renewal of this policy “confirms an equal chance of success for all pupils in priority education and a same level of requirements for pupils in general” (circular No. 2006-058 published in Official Bulletin No. 14, 2006).

Pupils in collèges designated as network leaders in the “ambition-réussite” (ambition success) programme come mainly from underprivileged social categories and are well behind when they enter lower secondary school. To a lesser extent, this can also be observed among lower secondary-school pupils in the “réseaux réussite scolaire” (educational success networks). They are less proficient in the basic skills and on average, their results in the “brevet” exam (ISCED 2 certificate) are lower.

Source: MEN-DEPP, Scolarité (Education) filesCoverage: Metropolitan France + DOM, public sector

The 2005-2006 academic year was a period of reorganisation and renewal in priority education. The aim of the renewal project was to reinforce the existing educational support measures at several distinct levels of involvement. In priority education as a whole, collège (lower secondary school) becomes “the benchmark of the network it forms with the primary and nursery schools its pupils come from. The 253 “ambition réussite” (ambition success) and other so-called “educational success” networks (circular No. 2006-058 published in Official Bulletin No. 14, 2006) are organised on the basis of this model, replacing the existing networks in priority education. As from the start of the 2005 academic year, the percentage of children with working-class and inactive parents (table 1) includes the children of skilled, unskilled and farm workers, retired employees or workers and individuals with no professional activity. The percentage of pupils entering Year 7 at least a year behind concerns those starting secondary education or who were in Year 6 in an AR school at the beginning of the 2007 academic year who had repeated at least one year in primary school. The percentages of proficiency in basic skills (graph 03) are indicated with a confidence interval of more or less 2-3 points. Graph 02 shows the distribution of the average marks out of 20 in the written exams of the national brevet diploma (DNB) 2007 session. When the sample for calculating the skills’ proficiency level at the end of Year 6 was provided, the list of AR schools was still incomplete.

05priority education01 Proportions of children with working-class, inactive, managerial-level and teacher parents and pupils behind on entering Year 7 in September 2007.

% children of working-class and inactive

parents

% children of managerial-level

parents and teachers

% children behind

entering Yr 7

“Ambition success” network (RAR) 74.9 8.1 31.5

Educational success network (RRS) 56.8 19.0 24.0

Excluding priority education (PE) 35.1 37.3 14.5

Total 42.2 31.2 1�.4Source: MEN-DEPP

Source: MEN-DEPP

French Mathematics

03 Proportion of pupils proficient in basic skills in 2008 (%)

at end of Year 10

at end of Year 6

RAR

RRS

RAR

RRS

Publicexcluding PE

Publicexcluding PE

81.7

68.5

50.9

90.5

81.8

68.9

71.4

77.1

89.9 92.4

82.7

75.1

Source: MEN-DEPP

02 Distribution of pupils according to written exam marks in the 2007 national brevet diploma

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

In AR schools

In RRS

Excluding PE

Total

Interpretation: in “ambition success” schools, 0.3% pupils obtained 0-1 in national brevet diploma (DNB) written exams in the June 2007 session compared to 0.2% pupils in educational success schools, 0.1% pupils in schools outside priority education areas and 0.1% for pupils in general.

0�


Supported by public policies, apprenticeship has spread upwards through the system since 1987

to become part of new qualifications and specialisa-tions. Nevertheless, the number of apprentices only really took off after 1993 once a four-year fall in CAP (certificate of vocational aptitude) enrolment, which has remained at under 200,000 apprentices since then, had been brought to an end. Over twenty years, the total number of apprentices has nearly doubled reaching 408,000 in 2006-07 (430,000 in 2007-08 accor-ding to the initial results of survey No.10). If numbers continue to progress at the same rate, the goal of 500,000 apprentices set by the 2005 social program-ming law will be reached by the end of 2010.

The CAP is currently still in the lead but now ac-counts for less than half the total number of appren-tices (45%). The other main qualifications prepared in apprenticeship are the BEP or brevet d’études professionnelles (certificate of vocational educa-tion), the vocational baccalauréat, the BP or brevet professionnel (vocational certificate) and the BTS or brevet de technicien supérieur (higher vocational diploma), each numbering between 40,000 and 50,000 apprentices compared to 180,000 for the CAP. Two out of ten apprentices prepare a baccalauréat-level qualification and the same proportion, a higher edu-cation qualification (table 01 and graph 03).

With a higher level of education, apprentices are ol-der: between 1986-87 and 2006-07, their average age rose from 17.5 to 18.7 years. By combining several contracts, education can now be continued while in apprenticeship, an option which is more frequent in secondary education: apprentices represent 60% of recruits in the first year of BP and 40% in the profes-

sional baccalauréat programmes. In higher educa-tion, apprenticeship recruits are to be found mainly among lycée and university students: in 2006-07, only 16% of BTS first-year apprentices had already been apprentices the previous year, together with 5% of DUT (technological university diploma) and 12% en-gineering students.

The proportion of apprenticeship in a given gene-ration has progressed rapidly since 1993 and to a greater extent for boys than for girls. After collège (lower secondary school), girls less often choose the vocational path where they go for a much narrower range of options. In 2006-07, girl apprentices thus re-presented 3.7% of the female 15 to 19-year-old age group compared to 10.1% for boys of the same age (graph 02).

First-level apprenticeship (CAP-BEP) is traditionally more wide-spread in production (7 out of 10 appren-tices) than in service options where it is limited to a small number of diplomas with a majority of girls. We find the reverse situation in higher education (4 out of 10 apprentices in production options but 9 out of 10 in engineering courses) with the advent of new areas of activity in the service line of work, particularly in trade and management (graph 04). This evolution fa-vours the number of girls which has gained 2 points in twenty years (rising from 28% to 30% of appren-tices between 1986 and 2006), in spite of a 4-point drop in numbers at the lowest level (24% in 2006). Girl apprentices are older and more qualified than their masculine counterparts: 3 out of 10 girl apprentices prepare a higher education diploma compared to 2 out of 10 for boys.

The 19�7 Seguin reform opened up all levels of training and education to apprenticeship and increased the maximum age of entry into the apprenticeship system to 25: this boosted its development by making it part of a general scheme to improve education at all levels.

Coverage: Metropolitan France + DOMMEN-MESR, Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries

Apprentices are young people aged 16-25 preparing a vocational or technological education diploma (or certificate) in the framework of a specific type of employment contract combining on-the-job training – under the responsibility of an apprenticeship supervisor – and courses delivered in an apprenticeship centre. Centres de formation d’apprentis or CFA (apprenticeship centres) are schools delivering general, technical and practical education complementing and centred around on-the-job training. This is usually under the pedagogical responsibility of the Ministry of Education or Agriculture and Fisheries. They are generally created when agreements have been negotiated between the regions and organisations for a renewable period of five years. There are different categories of CFA depending on the organisations running them: municipalities, chambers of commerce and industry, chambers of trade, private organisations, public educational institutions. A limited number of CFA known as “national convention” centres, are the result of agreements signed with the State.

0�education with apprenticeship

Metropolitan France + DOM

Source: MEN-MESR-DEPP and Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries

03 Evolution in number of apprentices at different levels of education (1980-2006)

CAP/MC

Other level V (BEP)

Level IV (vocational bac., BP)

Level III (BTS) Levels II & I

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

1980 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 2006

01 Evolution in apprentice numbers (1990-200�)Metropolitan France + DOM

1990-91 1995-9� 2000-01 2004-05 2005-0� 200�-07

Level V 215,274 232,135 245,333 225,274 228,613 236,036

Level IV 13,210 41,327 69,355 80,623 86,609 91,512

Level III 1,319 15,273 35,553 39,560 44,233 50,434

Levels II et I 0 4,777 15,633 23,531 26,404 30,151

Total 229,�03 293,512 3�5,�74 3��,9�� 3�5,�59 40�,133Source: MEN-MESR-DEPP (survey 51 on apprenticeship centres)

Sources: MEN-MESR-DEPP (survey of apprenticeship centres and schools), INSEE (provisional evaluation based on results of 2004, 2005 and 2006 surveys)

Metropolitan France

02 Evolution in proportion of apprentices overall in the 15-19 and 20-24 age groups (1980-2006)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1980 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 2006

Men aged 15-19Men aged 20-24

Women aged 15-19Women aged 20-24

Interpretation: in 2006, 10.1% of men in the 15-19 age group were enrolled in apprenticeship centres.

Girls Services


04 Proportion of girls and service options at different levels of education with apprenticeship (2006-07)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90%

Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1

Source: MEN-MESR-DEPP and Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries

07

Source: MEN-DGESCOCoverage: Metropolitan France + DOM


D ifferent types of financial aid help families to ensure their children’s education. Grants and

allowances conditioned by resources constitute the most direct forms of aid, representing an annual budget of around 566 million euros in 2007.

In 2007-2008, national grants awarded in public and private-sector secondary education concerned 1,282,000 young people in Metropolitan France and the DOM (overseas departments) i.e. 24% of pupils in general. This proportion has varied very little sin-ce 2000 and is twice as high in public as in private education: 26.9% compared to 12.8%. These grants were awarded to 766,000 pupils in collège (lower secondary) and 516,000 in lycée (upper secondary): the percentage of grant beneficiaries is far higher in vocational (34%) than in general or technological lycées.

After being extended in 2006, the merit-grant pro-gramme with grants amounting to 800 euros conti-nued to progress in 2007-2008 with nearly 77,000 beneficiaries (i.e. +10% compared to the previous year). Grants are automatically awarded to eligible lycée pupils if they have obtained their national bre-vet diploma (DNB) with “merit” or “distinction” and may also be awarded to those who have demonstra-ted particular efforts in their work.

In addition to lycée grants, there are allowances for eligible pupils which depend on the courses they choose: allowances delivered on access to Years 11,12 and 13 and an equipment and/or qualification allowance for specific vocational or technological

courses. A boarding allowance is allocated to all national grant-holders enrolled as boarders in col-lège, lycée and regional special needs schools.

Alongside aid distributed according to nationally-defined criteria, social subsidy budgets (amounting to 42 million euros in 2007) are paid to schools to en-sure exceptional aid for the underprivileged families who need it most. The school Head decides on the aid granted to the families of pupils in his school af-ter consulting the educational team.

The social subsidies granted by the Ministry of Education are complemented by aid from other Mi-nistries and the regional authorities. Low-income families also benefit from “new school year” allo-wances (ARS – allocation de rentrée scolaire) for their school-going children aged 6-18 paid by the child benefit office (CAF - caisses d’allocations fa-miliales) totalling 1,314 million euros in 2007.

The ratio of all these financial aids to total public ex-penditure on education for 2005 placed France sli-ghtly above the OECD average. Some countries also declare aid in the form of (reimbursable) loans, far less substantial than the grants and subsidies (0.5% against 3.2% for the OECD average).

About a quarter of collège and lycée (lower and upper secondary) pupils receive direct State aid in the form of grants: the percentage increases to 34% in lycée professionnel (vocational training schools). �0� million euros of direct aid was allocated by the Ministry of Education in 2007, including allowances and social subsidies.

National grants: these are paid from funds on the Ministry of Education budget. There are also grants available from the local authorities (départements) not taken into consideration here which come from the “Conseil Général” budgets.

Secondary education grants: amounts depend on family resources and expenses, based on a national scale. Collège grants consist of three different annual amounts: 76.62 euros, 242.25 euros and 331.47euros. Lycée grants concern pupils enrolled in lycée and in EREA (regional special needs schools - including primary education), and also pupils in apprenticeship preparatory classes (CPA) and apprenticeship centres (CFA). The amount of the grant depends on the number of shares to which the family is entitled, varying from 3 to 10. One grant share amounted to 41.52 euros in 2007-2008.

Special needs grants: these are awarded to pupils required to attend school but who have been placed in special needs schools or follow extra courses or additional rehabilitation schemes.

Social subsidy for canteens: this was set up to facilitate access to school meals for the greatest possible number of collège and lycée pupils and to avoid certain pupils being deprived of school meals due to the fact that their families cannot afford the expense.

Social subsidies for collège and lycée pupils: these are designed to meet difficulties which some pupils or their families may encounter in supporting expenses inherent in educational or school life. The special benefits are either financial or in-kind (transport and school outings, dental health care, professional or sports equipment, manuals and school supplies...).

07social subsidies for collège and lycée pupils01 Evolution in number of secondary education pupils receiving financial aid (public and private)


2000-2001 2004-2005 2005-200� 200�-2007 2007-200�

Grant-holders in collège (lower secondary education) 7�9,72� 772,124 770,709 7�0,275 7��,055

% grant-holders in collège 23.6 23.4 23.6 24.4 24.2

Grant-holders in LEGT (upper se-condary general & technological) 300,891 303,792 297,277 286,876 261,466

% grant-holders in LEGT 19.1 18.9 18.6 18.0 17.7

Grant-holders in LP (upper secondary vocational) 288,482 264,227 261,656 252,501 254,848

% grant-holders in LP 36.6 36.6 36.1 35.3 33.8

Total lycée grant-holders 5�9,373 5��,019 55�,933 539,377 51�,314

Of which merit grants 9,259 28,619 29,293 69,996 76,960

% lycée grant-holders 26.7 25.0 24.7 24.3 23.5

Total grant-holders (collèges & lycées) 1,379,099 1,340,143 1,329,�42 1,319,�52 1,2�2,3�9

% pupils concerned (collèges & lycées) 24.8 24.1 24.2 24.4 23.9

Number receiving education allowances (1) 581,907 607,390 615,260 611,244 568,587

(1) Allowance for equipment, qualification, entry into Year 11, 12, 13, boarding (certain allo-wances may be held concurrently).Source: MEN-DGESCO

02 Aid for pupils (public + private)Metropolitan France + DOM

Type of aidAmount in

2001Amount in

2007

Evolution 2001-2007

in current €in constant

€

STATE AID

Direct aid

Collège grants 115,070,548 141,911,509 + 23.3% + 11.4%

Lycée grants (1) 206,853,182 191,768,590 - 7.3% - 16.2%

Merit grants - lycée (2) 7,055,358 61,568,000 NS NS

Allowances (lycée excl. boarding) 165,420,602 157,979,525 - 4.5% - 13.7%

Boarding allowance - collège (3) 1,532,918

Boarding allowance - lycée (3) 10,669,281

Special needs allowance 1,038,290 546,963 - 47.3% - 52.4%

Social subsidies 67,900,000 42,100,000 - 38.0% - 44.0%

Total direct aid 5�3,337,9�0 �0�,07�,7�� + 7.9% - 2.5%

Only direct aid from the Ministry of Education is referred to here.(1) The drop is linked directly to the decrease in numbers of pupils enrolled in lycées.(2) The system was modified in 2006 leading to an increase in both amounts and beneficiaries.(3) Came into effect as from the beginning of the 2001-2002 academic year.Source: MEN-DGESCO, 2007 expenditure except for social subsidies (LFI – initial finance law).

03 Average amount of aid received per grant-holder and numbers concerned (grants + allowances in current € excluding social subsidies and grants for special needs education)


2000-2001

2004-2005

2005-200�

200�-2007

2007-200�

Evolution 2000/2007

Average aid in collège (€) 152 1�4 1�7 170 1�� + 23.�%

Number grant-holders in collège (1) 789.7 772.1 770.7 780.3 766.1 - 3.0%

Number pupils in collège (1) 3,346.3 3,296.9 3,266.5 3,197.8 3,160.3 - 5.6%

Average aid in lycée (€) ��4 71� 733 79� �1� + 23.2%

Number grant-holders in lycée (1) 589.4 568.0 558.9 539.4 516.3 - 12.4%

Number pupils in lycée (1) 2,204.2 2,270.3 2,260.1 2,215.1 2,196.0 - 0.4%

(1) in thousands.Source: MEN-DGESCO

Source: OECD

11.0

5.7

4.9

4.8

3.3

3.0

2.0

1.7

1.6

0.8

0.5

0.6

0.9

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11%

Denmark

Netherlands

Sweden

Germany

France*

Finland

Belgium

Italy

Spain

United Kingdom

United States OECD averageLoansGrants

Financial aid for pupils in percentage of the total public expenditure on education

Primary, secondary and post-secondary (excl. higher) education – 2005

*In France, financial aid to pupils includes grants and subsidies awarded by Ministries and regional authorities and the “new school year” allowance.

0�


In 2007, nearly 800,000 young men and women of French nationality aged 17 or more participated

in the journée d’appel de préparation à la défense (JAPD – national defence information day) and passed tests to assess written comprehension.

Three specific aspects were evaluated: reading auto-maticity, lexical knowledge and complex processing of written documents. A threshold of competence was fixed for each of these: below a certain level, individuals were considered to have problems with the skill in question (-) and above, they were deemed to be proficient in this skill (+). Based on the com-bined results, eight reader profiles were determined (table 01).

The weak points of young people with the greatest difficulties (profiles 1 & 2), representing 4.9% of young people in general, were due to a significant lack of vocabulary. Furthermore, profile 1 individuals (2.6%) had not acquired the basic mechanisms for processing written language. Some of these undoub-tedly did not read. On the other hand, profile 3 & 4 individuals (701%) had an acceptable level of voca-bulary but were unable to process complex written documents.

The tests also enabled the identification of specific reader profiles: 9.8% of young people (profiles 5a & 5b) managed to compensate for their difficulties and attain a certain level of comprehension. Profile 5c (14% overall) refers to a group of readers who managed complex processing of the written word in spite of significant deficiencies in the automatic processes involved in identifying words, by calling

upon proven lexical skills. Finally, profile 5d concerns individuals who were successful all round i.e. 64.2% of the total number. According to the test criteria, these young people had everything it takes for pro-perly developing their reading skills and coping with the multiplicity of texts.

Profile classification is closely linked to these young people’s level of education: in profile 1, we find many young people who had been through a short, or even very short, cycle of education whereas profile 5d is mainly main up of upper secondary level pupils from the general programme (graph 02).

Boys more often had problems than girls (table 01). They were less successful in the comprehension tests and most of them were to be found in profiles 1, 2, 3 & 4. They were also characterised by deficien-cies in the basic language processing mechanisms which is why there were more of them in profiles 1, 3, 5a & 5c (graph 04). From 2004 to 2007, the propor-tion of girls with reading problems remained 6 points lower than that of boys (table 03).

Between 2004 and 2007, the proportion of young peo-ple with reading problems at the JAPD rose from 11% to 12%. This evolution may be partially explained by certain technical aspects such as the quality of the correction process. However, this observation re-flects other recent surveys indicating an increase in the number of young people with reading problems in the French education system (see results of the international PISA survey, indicator 15).

In 2007, 7�.2% of young people aged around 17 read well.On the other hand, 12% encountered comprehension difficulties. Around 4.9% of young people in general were in great difficulty.The evaluation also reveals that 9.�% of young people were poor readers.

Source: JAPD - MEN-DEPP processingCoverage: Young French men and women who participated in the 2007 JAPD in Metropolitan France

The aim of JAPD tests is to spot three main categories of difficulty of varying nature in poor readers:- Deficient automatisation of the mechanisms used to identify words: rather than focusing on putting together meaning, awkward readers need to focus on recognising words which should be done without having to think about it;- Insufficient language skills: this is essentially due to a lack of lexical knowledge;- Defective performance in the complex processing needed to understand a document: a number of young people are rather unsuccessful in processing texts, either through lack of ability or difficulties in concentration ..., while neither their capacity to identify words nor their language skills are called into question.

Four levels of education have been defined depending on the courses in which these young people state they are or have been enrolled: level 1 corresponds to education which has not gone beyond collège (lower secondary); level 2 corresponds to short vocational studies (CAP or BEP level); level 3 corresponds to vocational and technical courses beyond the BEP and up to the vocational baccalauréat or technical diploma; level 4 corresponds to general studies programmes as from lycée.

0�young people’s reading skills01 Reading profiles among the young based on 2007 JAPD sample

in %

ProfileComplex

processingReading

automaticity Lexical

knowledge Boys Girls Total

5d + + + 59.5 69.1 64.2Efficient readers

5c + - + 16.0 11.9 14.0 78,2

5b + + - 6.7 8.0 7.3 Poor readers

5a + - - 2.8 2.3 2.5 9,8

4 - + + 4.6 3.0 3.9Very poor

reading skills

3 - - + 4.3 1.9 3.2 7,1

2 - + - 2.6 2.0 2.3Severe

problems

1 - - - 3.5 1.8 2.6 4,9

Interpretation: Combining three aspects of the assessment produces 8 profile definitions.Profile numbers 1 – 4 concern individuals lacking the ability to accomplish complex processing (very poor understanding in extended reading, very ineffective in searching for information). They are below the accepted threshold of reading literacy. Profile numbers 5a, 5b, 5c and 5d are above this threshold but their skills are more or less sound and they may need to make quite a lot of effort to compensate.Source: Ministry of Defence – DSN, MEN-MESR-DEPP

03 Distribution of young people participating in JAPD according to their reading profile – evolution between 2004 and 2007

2004 2005 200� 2007

Total

Efficient readers 79.5 79.6 78.7 78.2

Poor readers 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.8

Reading problems 11.0 10.9 11.7 12.0

of which with severe problems 4.4 4.3 4.8 4.9

Boys


Poor readers 9.2 9.3 9.2 9.5


of which with severe problems 5.7 5.4 5.9 6.1

Girls


Poor readers 9.7 9.8 10.0 10.3


of which with severe problems 3.2 3.2 3.6 3.8Source: Ministry of Defence – DSN, MEN-DEPP

Source: Ministry of Defence – DSN, MEN-DEPP

0 20 40 60 80 100%

Profile 5d

Profile 5c

Profile 5b

Profile 5a

Profile 4

Profile 3

Profile 2

Profile 1 Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

02 Distribution of each reader profile according to level of education (2007 JAPD)

Interpretation: 35% of profile 1 young people have gone no further than collège withtheir education (education level 1) and 56% are or were enrolled in short vocational education cycles at CAP or BEP level (education level 2).

04 Distribution of each reader profile according to gender (2007 JAPD)

0 20 40 60 80 100%

Profile 5d

Profile 5c

Profile 5b

Profile 5a

Profile 4

Profile 3

Profile 2

Profile 1 Boys

Girls

Source: Ministry of Defence – DSN, MEN-DEPP

47.7

58.7

46.9

57.0

61.7

70.6

58.5

67.1

52.3

41.3

53.1

43.0

38.3

29.4

41.5

32.9

09


A s in the other Latin countries, France’s adult po-pulation in general is reasonably well-educated.

When the current generation of 60-year-olds was at school, secondary and higher education were limi-ted compared to the United States and other Euro-pean countries. The younger generations however have had the advantage of considerable advances in secondary and higher education.

Among the cohorts of young people who have just ended their education, 42% are higher education graduates (table 01). 11% of these individuals hold a licence or maîtrise (pre-masters degrees), 13% a masters (five years) and 1% a research doctorate. In addition, 16% ended their education with a diploma awarded after a shorter cycle of higher education (BTS, DUT, paramedic and social studies diplomas).

These cohorts having completed their initial educa-tion between 2004 and 2006 also include 40% young people holding upper secondary qualifications and 18% holding lower-level qualifications (non-inclusive of CAP, BEP or baccalauréat; see indicator 10). Tho-se whose highest qualification is a baccalauréat or equivalent are those who have followed higher edu-cation courses without obtaining the qualification (10%) and those (12%) who ended their education after completing Year 13, in a vocational stream for the most part. To conclude, the highest level qualifi-cation of 8% and 9% of those leaving the education system is respectively a certificate of vocational ap-titude or of vocational education.

The breakdown of adult population by age group in 2006 shows the substantial progress in level of edu-cation and qualification accomplished over 30 years: while in the 25-34 age group there are more higher education graduates than unqualified individuals, the situation is completely the opposite among the 55-64 age group (table 02). And young women are now better qualified than men (indicator 14) who are more often holders of vocational qualifications (CAP, BEP).

Source: INSEE Employment surveysCoverage: Metropolitan France

Data in tables 01 & 02 are provided by INSEE employment surveys. Table 01 concerns the cohorts leaving school after initial education during the 2004-2006 period. Leaving school after initial education constitutes the first break in education (statistical definition). Statistics concerning the cohorts ending their education in year “n” are based on the following year’s (“n + 1”) data. Evaluation is difficult. Young people lack stability after the ending their education. Samples of the different cohorts are limited. To reduce risks, the statistics consist in the averages of the latest observations (2007 observation of the 2006 cohort, 2006 of the 2005 and 2005 of the 2004 cohorts). The distribution of higher education qualifications is based on the “licence, master, doctorat” (bachelor, master, doctorate) courses and could be refined. Table 02 is based on more extensive samples of adult populations broken down into broad age groups.

The level of qualification among the younger generations in France is on the rise. Among the cohorts who have recently ended their education, 42% are higher education graduates and 40% hold upper secondary education qualifications.

09level of qualification

02 Highest qualification obtained according to age and gender (in %)

Aged 25-34 Aged 35-44 Aged 45-54 Aged 55-�4

Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men

No diploma or CEP 11.0 12.4 19.0 19.8 29.7 27.1 42.7 36.1

BEPC alone 5.0 6.3 8.7 6.6 11.4 8.1 9.5 7.2

CAP, BEP or equivalent 15.8 21.4 26.5 35.0 23.2 34.2 21.0 28.3

Baccalauréat or vocational certificate 21.6 22.8 17.1 12.4 15.2 11.8 11.6 11.4

Baccalauréat + 2 years 21.5 17.2 14.5 11.9 10.9 7.5 7.9 5.9

Higher diploma 25.0 19.9 14.3 14.3 9.6 11.2 7.3 11.1

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

% holders baccalauréat or higher ��.2 59.9 45.� 3�.� 35.� 30.5 2�.� 2�.4

Coverage: Metropolitan France, individuals aged 25 - 64Source: INSEE, Employment surveys 1st – 4th quarters 200� (results in annual average).

01 Distribution of cohorts leaving initial education according to their highest qualification

ISCED*

Cohorts 2004-200� (average)

Highest qualificationin

thousands %

Doctorate level (except health) 6 5 1

“Master” Level 5A 99 13

“Licence” Level 5A 77 11

Total courses possibly leading to research activities 5A 1�7 2�

Total courses completed 5B 119 1�

Total higher education 5/�/ 30� 42

Baccalauréat or equivalent 3A/C 163 22

of which: have followed higher education courses 3A/C 74 10

CAP, BEP or equivalent 3C 126 18

Total holding upper secondary education diplomas 3A/C 2�9 40

Brevet (certificate) 2 58 8

No diploma 0/2 76 10

Total brevet or less 0/2 134 1�

Total leavers 729 100

* UNESCO’s international classification of education categories (ISCED) enables the definition of comparable indicators in different countries.N.B.: the percentages are more representative than the amounts of leavers.Source: DEPP calculations based on INSEE Employment surveys 2004-2007 (annual average)

10


The number of “unqualified” school-leavers at levels Vbis and VI is calculated on the basis of several sources with similar results (graph 03). In graph 03, the indicator calculated on the basis of school statistics for student traffic is a frequency where the denominator is the flow of Vbis and VI school-leavers increased by the flow of young people reaching the higher education level (V). Graph 02 is also based on the student traffic statistics of students enrolled in all educational and vocational training institutions (including apprentices and pupils in agricultural schools). Table 01 concerns young people aged 20-24 when they were surveyed in 2007 (INSEE Employment surveys). These young people obtained their CAP, BEP or baccalauréat 4/5 years earlier and so observations concerning this group describe facts previous to the moment of the first break. In this table, the numbers cited are those of an average “age group” of young people aged 20-24 (i.e. a fifth of the total).

The “unqualified” definition prevalent in the ‘�0s concerns a little over 5% of young people leaving school. The total percentage of young people without an upper secondary diploma (CAP, BEP or baccalauréat) amounted to 1�% in 2007.

Source: OECD, MEN-DEPP and INSEE Employment surveysCoverage: OECD countries and Metropolitan France

Concerning the younger generations, the Euro-pean community and OECD consider completing

upper secondary education endorsed by a diploma or certificate as the minimum level of qualification (see indicator 15). Without this “ticket”, significant proportions of young people and adults find it ex-tremely difficult to find and keep a steady job (indi-cator 27). Improving the basic skills and vocational proficiency of youth in general, endorsed by a reco-gnised diploma or title, is a challenge for society’s economy and cohesion.

With 82% of its 25-34 age group holding upper secon-dary qualifications in 2006, France is above the OECD average. In most developed countries, young women are usually ahead of men.

In 2007, the educational qualifications of around 130,000 young people on average per age group between 20 and 24 were insufficient (table 01). They were categorised at different levels of education using the 1967-1969 French system: 4.5% declared having been enrolled in a general, technological or vocational Year 13 and were classified as “bac level” (IV); the same proportion had followed the final year of a BEP or CAP curriculum and were classified as “CAP level” (V) as were the 2% who had been en-rolled in Year 11 or Year 12. Only 7% were classified at levels Vbis and VI, targeted by French policies to reduce school failure for many years.

The first two categories had followed an upper se-condary education cycle up to Year 13 and failed

the exams (9%); on average, they left the education system aged nineteen. The latter two categories put an end to their education before the end of upper se-condary and were at least a year younger. Aged 20-24 in 2007, these individuals had ended their education 4-5 years before on average i.e. around 2002/2003.

To prevent school-leaving at the lowest levels, the Ministry developed a statistical monitoring system. Based on student traffic in secondary education, 9% adolescents could be reckoned to have left school in 2002 and 2003 before the final year leading to an upper secondary education diploma. Since then, this percentage has slightly decreased: it dropped to 7% in 2006, 2% leaving after a general or technological Year 11 or 12 and 5% after lower secondary educa-tion or a first year in CAP or BEP course (graph 02). This proportion of “unqualified” young school-lea-vers at levels Vbis and VI of the 1969 French classi-fication system has dropped dramatically since the ‘60s when it was over 65% (graph 03).

10school-leaving at low levels of education01 Highest level qualifications and education reached by young people aged 20-24 (2007)

ISCED* NF**

Total Men Womenfor an age group in

thousands % % %

Holding higher education, baccalauréat or CAP/BEP- equivalent diploma

3 and +

3C

IV +

V

481

124

65

17

61

19

71

14Total upper secondary graduates �05 �2 �0 �5Have studied up until Year

13

2 and -

IV 33 4,5 4,5 4Final year CAP or BEP V V 33 4,5 6 3Year 11 or 12 general or techno V V 12 2 1,5 2Lower secondary, 1st year CAP/BEP Vbis-V Vbis-V 52 7 8 6

Total no upper secondary diploma 129 1� 20 15Total 734 100 100 100

* Positions in International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED).** Positions in French “level of education” classification (1969).Interpretation: in 2007, 82% of young people aged 20-24 state holding a higher education qualification, baccalauréat, BEP or CAP. On the other hand, 18% do not hold an upper secondary education qualification i.e. 129,000 young people per age group on average.Source: DEPP calculations based on INSEE 2007 Employment surveys (annual average)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40 %

Educational statistics Employment Surveys Pupil samples

Interpretation: in 1965 more than 35% of school-leavers ended their education “unqualified” in the language of that time. They left before the final year of a CAP or BEP or before Year 11, in other words, after primary education, lower secondary education or a few months of vocational training. In 2006, less than 6% of young people were in this case.Source: DEPP calculations based on INSEE Employment surveys, education statistics and samples of pupils.

03 Proportion of school-leavers with no qualifications (levels VI and Vbis) between 1965 and 2006

65 7168 74 77 80 83 86 89 92 95 0198 0604

02 Number of school-leavers leaving secondary education for the first time by class and level of education

Source: education statistics, MEN-DEPP

0

10

20

30

40

50%

1996 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 2006

General and techno Year 13Vocational Year 13 (bac pro and equivalents)1st year bac pro and BP

End CAP or BEPYear 11 or 12 general and technoLower secondary, 1st year CAP/BEP(Vbis-VI)

Source : édition 2006 de « Regards sur l'éducation », OCDESource: OECD, 2008 edition of Regards sur l'éducation (based on surveys concerning workforces)

* Upper secondary education of less than 2 years (standard duration) are not normally taken into account except in the United Kingdom.

Percentage of men and women aged 25-34 holding at least an upper secondary diploma (2006)

30% 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

KoreaCanadaFinland

DenmarkUnited States

GermanyNetherlands

FranceBelgium

United Kingdom*Italy

Spain WomenMen

11


Increased capacities in secondary and higher edu-cation mean that these have become accessible

to a much broader selection of the population. This widening of the spectrum and its limits may be un-derstood by comparing over time the amount of chil-dren from various social backgrounds in the 20-24 age group who reach baccalauréat level, and their distribution according to their highest diploma.

In the generations born in the forties, more than two out of three children with managerial-level pa-rents held a baccalauréat compared to only 6% of working-class children. Among recent generations born at the beginning of the ‘80s, half working-class children hold a baccalauréat (graph 01). Progres-sion was particularly spectacular over a ten-year period for the generations born between 1964-1968 and 1974-1978. In this respect, the extensive deve-lopment of capacities in the eighties contributed to reducing social inequalities.

Out of 100 young people aged 20-24 in 2006, 55 decla-re that they had access to higher education; among the remainder, 10 declare holding a technological or vocational baccalauréat as their highest qualifi-cation and 17 a certificate of vocational aptitude or studies (graph 02). Children of employees and from working-class backgrounds more often hold techno-logical and vocational secondary education diplo-mas (36%) than children of the self-employed, ma-nagerial-levels and technicians (17%). Compared to their predecessors aged 20-24 ten years earlier, less young people in 2006 were without any upper se-

condary education qualification at all. However, this remains the case far more frequently for employee and working-class children (22%) than for children with parents who are self-employed or hold mana-gerial-level, teaching and intermediate profession positions (8%).

Distribution among the three main streams (general, technological and vocational) of baccalauréat hol-ders in 2007 confirms the continuing influence of so-cial background on education paths: while working-class children are to be found in more or less equal numbers in the three types of baccalauréat, the vast majority of children with parents in the managerial-level class and more particularly, the children of tea-chers, choose the general stream (table 03), the most conducive to long higher-education cycles.

Increasing the proportion of baccalauréat holders among children of “underprivileged” backgrounds is one of the Ministry’s goals in the framework of the equal opportunity policy (law of 31 March 2006). For an estimated 18.5% in 2007, the goal monitored by a LOLF indicator is to reach 20% in 2010.

Half the working-class children born around 19�0 hold a baccalauréat.Upper secondary and higher education are more open to various social categories but considerable inequalities subsist between the general, technological and vocational options.

Sources: INSEE Employment, Training and Vocational Qualification SurveysMEN-DEPP (OCEAN)

The two graphs are based on INSEE surveys. Graph 01 concerns generations i.e. young people born in the same year. These data are provided by FQP and INSEE Employment surveys (1990 survey for generations born between 1964-1968, 1995 for those born 1969-1973, 2006 for the 1980-1984 generations). In theory, diplomas equivalent to the baccalauréat are not taken into account. Graph 02 concerns age groups (ages determined at the beginning of the year). The data come from INSEE employment surveys. “Social background” is determined on the traditional basis of parents’ socio-professional category, the father’s in priority. The SPC of the retired or unemployed is usually that of the last position. It is replaced by the mother’s profession when the father is absent or deceased. The social groups have been revised to facilitate comparison with the LOLF indicator (children of employees and working-class parents) and provide representative samples. The level of education is defined first on the basis of whether the young people have completed higher education or not, then on the basis of their highest qualification. Thus, the young who have had access to higher education and for the most part, are still studying, may be set apart from those who only exceptionally continue their education and whose current diploma is likely to be the highest they will ever attain. Table 03 is based on processing of the social backgrounds declared by all baccalauréat holders in the 2007 session after correcting and eliminating unspecified origins.

11level of education according to social category

Sources: LASMAS and DEPP calculations based on INSEE Training and Vocational Qualification and Employment surveys

Working-class children All generationsChildren of managerial-level parents

01 Baccalauréat pass rate according to generation and social category

1929-1938

1939-1948

1949-1953

1954-1958

1959-1963

1964-1968

1969-1973

1974-1978

1979-1983

1980-1984

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100%

Before 1929

Interpretation: among the young born between 1980 and 1984, 89% of those with managerial-level fathers obtain their baccalauréat compared to 50% working-class children. This is well above figures for generations born in the ‘30s where 41% of children with managerial-level parents obtained the baccalauréat compared to only 2% of working-class children.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100%

1996 2006 1996 2006 1996 2006

Working class, employees Total Self-employed, managerial-level, teachers and intermediary levels

Brevet or no diploma

CAP, BEP

Technological, vocationalbaccalauréats, equivalents

General baccalauréat

Higher education

02 Qualifications of young people aged 20-24 according to social category (1996 and 2006)

Source: DEPP calculations based on INSEE 1996 and 2006 Employment surveys (annual average)

Interpretation: in 2006, out of 100 employee or working-class children aged 20-24, 40 accessed higher education. Among the remainder, 23 gave their highest diploma as a certificate of vocational aptitude or education, 13 a technological, vocational or equivalent baccalauréat and 3, a general baccalauréat. Overall, 78% of these young people have at least an upper secondary education qualification compared to 92% of those with self-employed, managerial, intermediary-level and teacher parents.

03 Distribution by stream of successful 2007 baccalauréat candidates based on social background (%)

General Technology Vocational

Farmers 55.6 24.4 20.0

Skilled craftsmen, merchandisers, businessmen 50.5 25.8 23.7

Managers, higher-level intellectual prof. 75.6 16.5 7.9

of which teachers and equivalent 82.6 13.7 3.7

Intermediary professions 58.4 27.8 13.8

of which primary school teachers and equivalent 77.5 15.5 7.0

Employees 48.2 30.7 21.2

Working class 34.1 31.6 34.3

Retired 38.5 27.8 33.8

Total 53.7 2�.2 20.0

Interpretation: in 2007, 34.1% of working-class children holding a baccalauréat obtained a general, 31.6% a technological and 34.3% a vocational baccalauréat.Source: MEN-DEPP (OCEAN)

12


The unemployment rate of economically ac-tive young people aged 15-24 was 19% in 2007.

The unemployed only represented 7% of these age groups since a large proportion of them were conti-nuing their education and therefore not considered as “economically active” (table 01).

Unemployment of young people “overreacts” to the labour market climate. The unemployment rate of young people decreased between 2006 and 2007, reflecting an increase in employee numbers in the competitive sector. Employment in general rose by 380,000 jobs in 2007 following an increase of 280,000 in 2006 [1].

Various indicators are required to compare the unemployment risk run by young people in different countries. Vocational training and student jobs mean that the amount of economically active young peo-ple may be overestimated and cause discrepancies between the rate and proportions of unemployment. Even so, youth unemployment rates as often as not follow the same trends as those of the workforce in general in European Union countries. Compared to the EU average, this is the case for 22 out of 27 Mem-ber States and 12 out of the 16 shown here (interna-tional graph). Thus, entry to the job market is deter-mined by labour market vitality. As often as not, the proportion of unemployed in an age group confirms these rates. The three indicators converge to show conditions particularly conducive to job market entry in the Netherlands, Denmark, Austria and Ireland and difficult in Poland, Greece, Spain and France. Howe-ver, they diverge in Germany where youth unemploy-

ment is moderate in spite of a high overall rate, and also in Italy, Sweden and even Finland where, on the contrary, youth unemployment is high in spite of mo-derate overall rates.In the Netherlands, Denmark and Finland where la-bour markets are dynamic and conditions for edu-cation-to-work transition are better, there is a high proportion of employment during education, often through apprenticeship under contract.

Unqualified young people run an alarmingly high risk of unemployment in France. This was at its highest in the first half of 2006 and has dropped slightly since (graph 03). Despite their more recent entry to the labour market, young people with at least an upper secondary education qualification ran far less risk of unemployment and the rate showed a distinct downward trend at the beginning of 2007.

A large number of the less qualified continue to have employment difficulties beyond the first years following their school-leaving [2]. Seven years after finishing their education, they have less often worked without interruption over the last twelve months than their qualified counterparts and their unemployment rate remains high (table 02).

[1] See Premières informations et premières synthèses No. 26.1, DARES, June 2008.[2] See Bref (Céreq publication) No. 234: “Les sept premières années de vie active de la Génération 1998 entre insertion et début de carrière“.

The exposure to unemployment of less qualified individuals is alarmingly high. That of qualified individuals decreased during the first half of 2007.

Source: Eurostat, INSEE, Employmentsurveys; Céreq, Génération 1998Coverage: European Union, Metropolitan France

A “rate” of unemployment’s denominator is the entire workforce seeking or holding employment (or up until 2001, accomplishing military service). However, the denominator of the percentage (or proportion) of unemployed among the young is the entire 15-24 age group (table 01 and international graph). Table 01 and graph 03 are based on the INSEE Employment surveys; the international graph is derived from Community surveys on workforces, based on national surveys such as the Employment survey; and finally, the source of table 02 is Céreq’s “Génération 1998”.

There is a break in series in table 01 and graph 03 between 2002 and 2003. In graph 03, the new standards show an unemployment rate which is 2.5 points lower in the first quarter of 2003 (inclusive of all levels of education) and a little lower in 2004 and 2005. In table 01, age was determined at the time of survey as from 2003, in harmony with the Community standard; this slightly reduces the break in series (-1.8 points in 2003).

12qualification and risk of unemployment

02 Unemployment and job instability in relation to the time elapsed since leaving school and the highest diploma

in %

Higher education graduates

Secondary education graduates

Brevet at the most

Unemployment rate

1 year later (1999) 10 15 28

3 years later (2001) 5 10 25

7 years later (2005) 5 9 22

Permanent work over the past 12 months

1st year (1999) 44 47 38

7th year (2005) 89 78 59

Interpretation: in 2005, seven years after their first break in education, unemployment was four times greater for young economically-active people whose highest diploma was a brevet than for higher education graduates. Moreover, less of them had permanent work throughout the year.Source: Génération 199�, CEREQ

01 Unemployment of youth and the total workforce

in %

Young people aged 15-24

Total workforce

Unemployment rate

Unemployment rate

% of unemployed Total

Higher education graduates

March 1980 13.9 7.7 6.1 3.6

March 1985 23.7 12.3 10.2 3.8

January 1990 18.1 8.0 9.2 3.5

March 1995 24.0 9.2 11.6 6.7

March 2000 19.3 7.2 10.0 5.2

2003 18.3 7.0 8.5 6.1

2004 19.7 7.6 8.9 6.4

2005 20.2 7.8 8.9 6.2

2006 21.3 8.2 8.8 5.8

2007 1�.7 7.3 �.0 5.4Source: DEPP calculations based on INSEE Employment surveys (annual average as from 2003)

05

101520253035404550%

Year

No diplomaOnly a Brevet

CAP, BEPBaccalauréat

Higher education

03 Unemployment rate of the young economically-active in the 15-24 age group in relation to their level of qualification (1971-2007)

Source: DEPP calculations based on INSEE Employment surveys (first two quarter average as from 2003)

Interpretation: the young economically-active have been hard hit by unemployment since the mid-‘70s, particularly the less qualified. Given the restructuring of the Employment survey, the data for 2003-2007 cannot be directly compared to previous years: the new unemployment estimate is closer to Community standards and the weighting has changed.

3-71

3-73

1-75

3-77

3-79

3-81

3-83

3-85

3-87

3-89

3-91

3-93

3-95

3-97

1-99

3-01

S1-03

S1-05

S1-07

Polan

d

Finlan

dSpa

inGree

ce E.U.

Hunga

ry

Sweden Ita

ly

Denmark

France

Belgium

Netherl

ands

German

y

United

Kingdo

mIre

landAust

ria

Czech R

epub

lic0

5

10

15

20

25%

Unemployment rate aged 15-2415-24 age group unemployed in % of youth (“proportion”)

Unemployment rate (all ages)

The unemployment rate of the total workforce stands at 7.1% on average in the European Union. The young unemployed aged 15-24 represent 6.8% of the age group’s total number (“proportion”) and 16% of the workforce (15-24 age group’s unemployment rate).

Unemployment In the European Union: rates and proportions among the 15-24 age group, all-age rate (2007)

Source: Eurostat statistics based on Community surveys relative to workforces (2007 annual average)

13


The opportunity to become a senior executive, teacher, doctor, lawyer, nurse, technician or

sales representative depends mainly on level of qualification and less on social background. Thus in 2006, at the outset of their careers, 79% of economi-cally-active graduates who had completed lengthy higher education courses worked in high- or inter-mediary-level professions. The proportion is 57% for short-course graduates and 23% for those whose hi-ghest diploma is the baccalauréat (graph 01). Long-cycle higher education graduates therefore have a 22-point advantage over short-cycle graduates concerning entry to such professions, which is far more significant than the advantage of children with managerial parents over working-class children (8 points) when they hold a higher education diploma of the same level.

Since 2002, a larger proportion of women on the la-bour market have access to high- and intermediary-level professions than men shortly after completing their education; in 2006, 42% of these young eco-nomically-active women work in such professions compared to 38% of their masculine counterparts. This result reflects the higher level of education of young women entering the labour market; however, with equal qualifications, they have less access to such professions than men.

Conditioned by the job and responsibilities, the sala-ry level also depends on the level of education, more specifically in the case of men. While differences in remuneration are not really significant among the

youngest, they increase depending on career path and age. And so around the age of 50, the average salary of higher education graduates is double that of unqualified employees, the ratio standing at 2.2 for men and 2.0 for women respectively (graph 02).

These discrepancies between men and women de-pend on the sector of activity in addition to areas of training: the public sector, where there are more wo-men working, offers lower salaries than the private sector.

At the outset of a career, socio-professional category depends on qualifications.Thanks to their higher qualifications, young working women are generally in more qualified positions than men.A higher education diploma greatly improves salary and career perspectives but in this case, more for men.

Source: OECD and MEN-DEPP calculations based on INSEE Employment surveysCoverage: Metropolitan France and OECD countries

Graph 01 concerns young people who are “economically active” (have or are seeking a job) and graph 02, full-time employees. ‘Long” and general higher education diplomas (5A) designates “grande école” (prestigious institutions with competitive entrance exams) and second- and third-cycle university qualifications. Short higher education diplomas are DUT, BTS and qualifications in paramedics and social studies. Only the former (5A) are taken into account in graph 03. Socio-professional backgrounds (graph 01) are classified into three categories: company directors plus high- and intermediary-level professions, working class and finally, employees, farmers, skilled craftsmen and merchandisers. The public sector (graph 01) includes employment in the Civil Service, hospitals and regional authorities but excludes publicly-owned companies. A salary or remuneration average divides the population into two equal groups, separating those who earn more from those who earn less. Graph 02 gives the average salaries in each of these categories.

13diploma, social status and salary

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90%

Long higher education qualification

Short higher education qualification

Hold baccalauréat No baccalauréat All qualifications

Man Father a teacher, executive or technician Father an employee or self-employed Working-class father Woman

01 Access to a high- or intermediary-level profession, according to diploma, gender and social background (2006)

Interpretation: in 2006, 81% of long-cycle higher-education male graduates (left-hand bars) have a high- or intermediary-level profession (including company directors), compared to 76% women, 75% young people with working-class fathers and 83% with fathers in a managerial position. These same proportions vary between 51% and 63% for short-cycle higher-education graduates, between 18% and 32% for baccalauréat holders and 5% and 13% below the baccalauréat.Coverage: economically active (hold or seek employment) individuals having left initial education 2-9 years earlier (between 1997 and 2004)

Source: DEPP calculations based on INSEE Employment surveys (four quarters in 2006)

Private

Public

0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

3 000

3 500

€4 000

0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

3 000

3 500

€4 000 Long-cycle higher education

Short-cycle higher education

Hold baccalauréat

CAP/BEP

Brevet

Certificat d’études (school-leaving certificate)

No diploma

Source: DEPP calculations based on the 2006 INSEE Employment surveys (four quarters)

Men Women

Interpretation: in 2006, half of the men graduates from long-cycle, higher-education programmes aged 45-54 declared a monthly salary of at least €3,100 (inclusive of monthly bonuses) and half of the women, a salary of at least €2,400. The salaries are given in 2006 euros.

02 Monthly salaries declared in 2006 in relation to age and qualification, average salaries of full-time employees

15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64

14


While their mathematics and scientific literacy is similar to that of boys, girls have a distinct

advantage over the latter in French or written com-prehension according to national and international assessments (indicators 16 and 20). Benefiting from better acquisition of these skills, girls’ educational paths are easier or smoother than boys’ on ave-rage but they continue to choose radically different streams for their options and specialities.

And so among adults aged 20-24, women are often more qualified than men (higher education diploma, baccalauréat, CAP or BEP). In 2007, this was the case for 85% of them compared to 80% men (table 01), in-dicating that they had fulfilled one of Europe’s Lisbon objectives (indicator 15) concerning the development of secondary education.

For more than three decades, the majority of bac-calauréat holders have been girls: 53% at the 2007 session and 58% among holders of a general bacca-lauréat. Even if these differences have become less obvious over the past few years, the predominance of girls varies greatly depending on the options (graph 02).

In the general stream, girls represent the vast majo-rity in arts subjects (nearly 81% of successful can-didates in 2007, i.e. 3 points less than the maximum recorded in 2002), are clearly in the majority in the economic and social stream (64%) but still in the mi-nority in the S stream despite recent progress (47% at the 2007 session i.e. 5 points more than at the be-

ginning of the ‘90s). In the technological stream, girls prevail in tertiary sector options (59% of STG bacca-lauréat holders, a 7-point drop since 2000 and 95% in the SMS option) and boys in industrial options (91% in STI). The proportion of girls in scientific streams (S, STI, STL), where the goal is 45% in the framework of the LOLF, shows an increase to more than 40% in 2007. Among holders of vocational baccalauréats, girls remain generally in the minority (43%).

The same differences are to be found in vocational training options leading to a CAP or BEP. Less nume-rous than boys overall, girls are still in the majority in tertiary sector options (71%) but conspicuously ab-sent from fields related to production (13.5%) despite progress recorded over the past few years (table 3).

Girls show a better acquisition of French language skills and their education paths are more successful than boys’.While clearly in the majority among general baccalauréat holders and university students, they are less numerous than boys in scientific and industrial training options.

Source: MEN-DEPPCoverage: Metropolitan France and Metropolitan France + DOM

14the education of boys and girls

03 Boys and girls in final year of CAP or BEP according to training option


2000 2007

Group of options Numbers % Girls Numbers % Girls

Processing 11,174 24.1 13,328 28.8

Civil engineering, construction, timber 18,244 6.2 21,578 9.0

Flexible materials 9,142 95.3 7,074 93.7

Mechanics, electricity, electronics 73,165 2.1 62,292 2.5

Production 113,0�1 12.6 105,37� 13.5

Trade, sales 24,275 65.6 33,065 57.9

Accounting, administration 35,144 58.4 23,959 55.5

Secretariat, office automation 29,615 95.6 23,158 94.2

Health and social 18,764 96.2 22,999 94.0

Hotel business, tourism 13,784 51.3 13,849 52.4

Hairdressing, beautician, care services 8,115 96.5 11,961 96.5

Local authority services 6,136 78.4 5,246 70.4

Services 144,24� 73.3 144,393 70.8

All training options 257,307 46.7 249,771 46.6Source: MEN-DEPPSource: MEN-DEPP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100%

02 Proportion of baccalauréat holders per option 1980-2007

Metropolitan France

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007

L

ES

S

STG

STI

PROF-prod

PROF-serv

SMS

01 Distribution of men and women aged 20-24 in relation to their highest diploma or classMetropolitan France

Highest diplomas or classes ISCED (1) NF (2)

Men Women

199� 2000 2005 2007 199� 2000 2005 2007

Higher ed. diplomas, baccalauréat and equivalent 3-6 I-IV 50 57 60 61 60 67 72 71

CAP & BEP 3C V 25 23 21 19 19 16 14 14

Total qualified 75 �0 �1 �0 79 �3 �� 5

Year 13 in upper secondary 2 IV-V 15 12 10 10 11 9 7 7

Years 11 and 12 (G & T) 2 V 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 2

Lower secondary, 1st yr. CAP/BEP (“unqualified”) 0-2 Vbis-VI 8 7 7 8 9 7 6 6

Left before the end of upper secondary 10 � 9 10 10 � 7 �

Total no diploma (Higher ed., bac, BEP or CAP) 25 20 19 20 21 17 14 15

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Source: DEPP calculations based on INSEE Employment surveys

15


A t the Lisbon summit in 2000, the European go-vernments agreed to promote society and eco-

nomy by emphasising the role of knowledge develo-pment. To this end, statistical monitoring and shared assessments help to identify efficient policies and make progress. In 2003, five objectives concerning high priorities in education and vocational training were determined: development of upper secondary education, reduction of early school-leaving, deve-lopment of lifelong learning, improvement of basic reading skills and increase in number of science and technology graduates.

In order for youth to acquire an education worthy of a knowledge economy, the goal to reach by 2010 is 85% of upper secondary education graduates throu-ghout the European Union. In 2007, this is the case for 78% of young people aged around 22 (82% in France). The expected growth therefore amounts to 7 points in five years, after a mere 1-point growth since 2000. Scientific abilities are crucial. The goal of a 15% in-crease in the number of higher education graduates in science and technology in ten years was reached in 2003.

At the same time, the rate of school failure needs to be reduced. It is hoped that 2010 will see a 20 % decrease in the percentage of the poorest readers i.e. 15.5 % of young people aged 15 with the lowest scores in international tests. In Spain, Italy, Austria and France, the proportions of poor readers were higher in 2006 than 2000 and on the contrary, lower in Poland. In addition, less than 10% of young people should be early school-leavers (see methodology)

in 2010 compared to 15% in 2007 (13% in France) and around 18% in 2000.

To a large extent, the relative weight of early school-leavers per country reflects differences in “levels of educations” which go back some time. In countries where young school-leavers represent less than 10%, their parents born around 1950 had already successfully completed an upper secondary edu-cation programme (graph 01). Secondary education has been accessible to the greatest possible number of people for a long time in these countries whereas development in this area has often lagged behind in the Community’s Latin countries.

An increase in the number of adults continuing to learn through education programmes, seminars, vo-cational training or courses with no particular goal in view is crucial for knowledge-development. The Community’s objective is to increase the proportion of people aged 24-64 who have followed courses or training during the past month to 12.5% by 2010, com-pared to 9.7% on average in 2007. This proportion is much lower in France (7.4%) than in the Scandina-vian countries or the United Kingdom (graph 03).

Following the Lisbon summit in 2000, the European Union determined quantified objectives concerning education and vocational training to promote a vigorous, knowledge-based society and economy.

The five quantified objectives were determined by the Council on 5th & 6th May 2003. Early school-leavers refers to the proportion of young people aged 18-24 no longer enrolled in education and with an education level of ISCED 2 or less. Development of secondary education refers to the proportion out of the total 20-24 age group with an education level of ISCED 3 or more (see indicator 09). The reading literacy threshold designates the proportion of young people capable of relating a simple text to everyday life. Graphs 01 and 03 are based on Community surveys concerning workforces (such as the French Employment survey) processed by Eurostat. Graph 02 is based on the results of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) survey, processed by OECD. In graph 01, all the bars represent the 100-complement of the successful secondary education criterion i.e. the proportion of young people aged 20-24 who have not successfully completed an upper secondary education programme. In Germany, the Netherlands and Denmark, the high age at which an upper secondary qualification (ISCED 3) is obtained explains the significant gap between this indicator and the percentage of early school-leavers. Graph 03 comprises a wide range of courses, seminars, education and training programmes. All of them are geared to transmitting knowledge and know-how and entail bringing together instructors, students or trainees. They may take place in the usual education structures or elsewhere (companies, associations, town halls, etc.) lead to a recognised diploma or title or not, be undertaken with a view to improving professional skills or not.

Source: Eurostat, OECD

15Europe’s Lisbon objectives

Source: Eurostat calculations based on Community surveys on workforces

0102030405060708090%

Young people aged 20-24 with no CAP, BEP or bacEarly school-leavers Individuals aged 45-54 with no CAP, BEP or bac

01 Early school-leavers and people with no upper secondary education qualifications (2007)

Interpretation: in 2007 in France, 13% of young people aged 18-24 continuing neither education nor training, have neither CAP, BEP, nor baccalauréat and are “early school-leavers”. Likewise, 18% of young people aged 20-24 have neither CAP, BEP, nor baccalauréat whether they continue their education or not (this is the 100-complement of the successful upper secondary criterion of 82%). In their parents’ generation (born between 1947 and 1956), 4 out of 10 individuals are in this situation.NB: not all Member States could be represented on this graph.

Portu

galSpa

inIta

ly

Roman

ia

Bulgari

aLat

via

Europ

ean U

nion

Greece

Eston

ia

United

Kingdo

m

German

y

France

Denmark

Belgiqu

e

Netherl

ands

Sweden

Irelan

dAust

ria

Hunga

ry

Lithu

ania

Finlan

d

Slovaki

a

Czech R

ep.

Polan

d

Source: Eurostat calculations based on Community workforce surveys

03 Adults having followed an education or training programme during the month preceding the survey (2007)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35%

Interpretation: in 2007 in France, 7.4% individuals aged 25-64 followed courses or a training programme during the previous month, all education levels included (yearly average).NB: not all the Member States could be represented on this graph (2006 data for the United Kingdom and Sweden).

Sweden

Denmark

United

Kingdo

m

Finlan

d

Netherl

ands

Sloven

ia

AustriaSpa

in

Europ

ean U

nion

German

y

Irelan

dFra

nce

BelgiumLat

via

Eston

iaIta

ly

Czech R

epub

lic

Lithu

ania

Polan

d

Portu

gal

Slovaki

a

Hunga

ryGree

ce

Bulgari

a

Roman

ia

30 25 20 15 10 5 0% 0% 5 10 15 20 25 30

PISA 2000

PISA 2006

b) 2000-2006 comparisona) situation in 2006

02 Proportion of young people aged 15 demonstrating poor reading skills (PISA)

Interpretation: according to the literacy tests in the 2006 survey, 8.5% young people aged 15 in France are very poor readers (less than 335 points) and 13.3%, poor readers (335 - 407 points) giving a total of 21.8% (less than 407 points) compared to 15.2% in 2000.

Very poor readers (- than 335 points)

Poor readers (335-407 points)

Source: OECD calculations on the basis of data from the Programme of International Student Assessment (PISA)

GreeceItaly

SpainPortugal

Czech RepublicFranceAustriaHungaryGermanyBelgiumPoland

DenmarkSweden

NetherlandsIrelandFinland

1�

In 2008 and for the second year running, pupils’ acquisition of the basic skills in French and mathe-

matics was assessed at the end of primary school and lower secondary education. The definition of basic skills was determined in reference to the programmes consistent with the common core of knowledge and skills. A set of MCQ (multiple choice question) tests was developed and experimented by groups of experts in each discipline in collaboration with DEPP experts in assessment. The selected skills did not include those linked to oral and writing skills. After analysing the experiment’s results, a level of re-quirement was determined giving a threshold above which pupils may be considered to be proficient in basic skills.

At the end of Year 6, 88% of pupils are proficient in basic skills in French and 98%, basic skills in ma-thematics (graph 01). At the end of Year 10, 81.1% of pupils master basic skills in French and 89,9%, basic skills in mathematics (graph 02).

At school, there are more girls proficient in basic French skills than boys (proportions being respec-tively 91% and 85.2%). The difference is more noti-ceable in lower secondary than in primary education (76.4% of boys compared to 86% of girls). There is no significant gap between boys and girls in mathema-tics in either primary (90.8% boys as against 90.9% girls) or lower secondary education (90.7% boys compared to 89.1% girls).

Pupils who are behind at the end of Year 6 represent 14% of the total number of the sample (see metho-

dology). In Year 10, at least 33% of the pupils are at least a year behind. At the end of both primary and lower secondary education, the proportion of pu-pils proficient in the basic French and mathematics skills is considerably lower among pupils who are behind than among those who are “on schedule”. This observation in itself is not enough to condemn repeating a year but reflects studies demonstrating its ineffectiveness [1].

These indicators are also calculated for pupils in priority education zones. Indicator 05 provides the results of primary and lower secondary schools be-longing to the “réussite scolaire” (educational suc-cess) and “ambition réussite” (ambition success) networks.

If the uncertainty margins inherent in this type of sur-vey based on samples are taken into account, there is no significant difference between the 2007 and 2008 results.

[1] “Le redoublement au cours de la scolarité obligatoire: nouvelles analyses, mêmes constats”, Dossier n° 166, MEN-MESR-DEPP.

In 200�, the proportion of pupils proficient in the basic French and mathematics skills required at the end of primary school and lower secondary education was evaluated.Depending on the education levels and subjects, this proportion varied from �0% to 90%.

Source: MEN-DEPPCoverage: Year 6 and Year 10 pupils attending school in Metropolitan France and DOMs in March 2008

In March 2008, representative samples of around 8,000 Year 6 and 8,000 Year 10 pupils took one-hour tests in French and mathematics. The indicators are shown with their confidence interval at 95% indicating an uncertainty margin linked to the sampling. The tests differ at different levels and the chosen levels of requirement are specific to each subject and each educational level. This is why results cannot be compared directly with each other. Likewise, it would be difficult to justify comparing these results with those of other assessments without taking into account the latter’s various requirements. For instance, JAPD tests are based on a less demanding concept of reading comprehension that the one determined for tests at the end of Year 10 (indicator 08).


1�French Mathematics

French Mathematics

01 Proportion of Year 6 pupils proficient in basic skills in French and mathematics (March 2008)

Source: MEN-DEPP

Source: MEN-DEPP

02 Proportion of Year 10 pupils proficient in basic skills in French and mathematics (March 2008)

Interpretation: 90.8% of Year 6 pupils are proficient in basic skills in French The confidence interval for this indicator is + 1.3%

Interpretation: 81.1% of Year 10 pupils are proficient in basic skills in mathematics The confidence interval for this indicator is + 2.6%

Total

Boys

Girls

“on schedule”

behind

Total

Boys

Girls

“on schedule”

behind

88.0%

85.2%

91.0%

91.6%

67.0%

90.8%

90.8%

90.9%

94.0%

72.0%

81.1%

76.4%

86.0%

91.2%

63.5%

89.9%

90.7%

89.1%

97.1%

77.3%

In French, about ��% of pupils at the end of Year � are capable of:

• Reading seeking information with reference to a dictionary; globally understanding a literary text or short document and identifying specific, detailed informationpartially mastering auto-matic recognition of graphological-phonological connections;

• Proficiency in language tools

identifying the main indicative tenses for the most frequently used verbs; recognising the simplest rules governing lexical and grammatical spelling

In mathematics, roughly 91% of pupils at the end of Year � are capable of:

• Processing numerical data

identifying information in a table; solving simple addition and subtraction problems

• Number and arithmetic skills

going from writing numbers in letters to numbers in digits (or the contrary), comparing, adding and subtracting natural whole numbers; recognising the double or the half of a “familiar” whole number; going from writing fractional forms in letters to writing them in digits (or the contrary) of simple fractions

• Space and geometry

visually recognising a triangle, a right-angled triangle, a rectangle, a square; recognising the representation of a cube in perspective or a rectangular parallelepiped

•Size and measurement

measuring the length of a segment; using time measurement units (without calculating)

In French, about �1% of pupils at the end of Year 10 are capable of:

• Understanding texts

recognising a descriptive text; differentiating the main types of text; identifying detailed information; making simple deductions; interpreting a text without difficulty on the basis of simple elements

• Proficiency in language tools

identifying fundamental syntactic structures; analysing the main verbal forms; using basic vocabulary appropriately; identifying different levels of language; recognising commonly used spelling and punctuation rules

In mathematics, roughly 90% of pupils at the end of Year 10 are capable of:

• Data organisation and management,

functions

using a graphic representation in simple examples (reading the coordinates of a point, link with a numerical table in a proportional situation, determining data in a statistical series); calculating the average in a statistical series; processing simple percentage problems

• Numbers and arithmetic

comparing relative decimal numbers written in the form of decimals; applying elementary operations to a concrete situation

• Size and measurement

operate a change of measurement units (hrs. mins. to mins., km to m, L to cl) for sizes (time, length, volume); calculate the perimeter of a triangle where the lengths of the sides are given; calculate the surface area of a square, a rectangle whose lengths of sides are given in the same units

• Geometry identify simple figures based on a coded figure and use its characteristics (equilateral triangle, circle, rectangle); write out and use Thales’ theorem in a simple example; recognise the pattern for a cube or a rectangular parallelepiped

basic skills at the end of primary and lower secondary education

17


In 2007, expenditure on primary education (nursery and primary school, special needs and education

for disabled pupils including associated activities) amounted to 35.9 billion euros.

About 40% of this expenditure was financed by the local authorities, mainly the municipalities responsi-ble for remunerating non-teaching staff (agents terri-toriaux spécialisés des écoles maternelles – ATSEM or specialised territorial agents for pre-school) and primary school operating and investment costs. Staff costs accounted for 76% of the total expenditure with a little over 25% for non-teaching staff.

From 1980 to 1992, the proportion of education ex-penditure dedicated to primary education declined steadily from 28.9% to 26.4% before increasing sli-ghtly to 28.5% in 2007. While domestic expenditure on education increased overall by 85% over 27 years in constant prices, the increase for primary educa-tion amounted to 82%.

Between 1980 and 2007, the average expenditure per primary school pupil in constant prices rose from 2,780 to 5,350 euros representing a 79% rise, or a yearly average of 2.2% (taking into account the 1999 and 2006 breaks in series), taking place over a long period of time in a context of reduction in the number of primary school pupils and restructuring of teaching careers (creation of the professeurs des écoles, or school teachers’, corps).

International comparisons of average costs per pupil in primary education show that in 2005, France was

still below the OECD average and well below coun-tries like the United States or Sweden. Among com-parable European countries, only Germany shows lower costs.

Since 1980, the gap between annual average expen-ditures per pre-primary and primary pupil has been greatly reduced reaching around 4,270 euros in 1997 thanks to growth in the average number of teachers per pupil and the high increase in staff expenditure by municipalities for pre-primary schooling. Since 1998, the cost per pupil in primary education has once again risen above the cost per pupil in pre-pri-mary (by about 9% in 2007).

From 1990 to 2007, the cost of primary education, cal-culated taking into account the average number of years spent in pre-primary and primary education for each of these years, has risen by 47%.

In 2007, more than a quarter of domestic expenditure on education i.e. 35.9 billion euros, was dedicated to primary school education.Since 19�0, the average expenditure per primary school pupil has increased by 79% in constant prices, reaching 5,350 euros in 2007.

Source: MEN-DEPPFor international comparisons: OECDCoverage: Metropolitan France + DOM, all

Amounts for the most recent year’s expenditure are draft figures.Expenditure on primary education includes total expenditure on public and private-sector schools in Metropolitan France and the DOM linked to education and associated activities: canteens and boarding houses, administration, guidance, school health structures, school supplies and transport, remuneration of education staff in training, etc. for the segment related to primary education.This expenditure is assessed each year by the Compte de l’éducation (Education Account), a satellite account of the Comptabilité nationale (National Accounts). In 1999, these accounts were restructured; three major changes were introduced:- DOM (overseas departments) were included- social charges linked to staff salaries were reassessed- household expenses were reassessed.As from 2006, the constitutional bylaw on budget acts (LOLF) modified State budgetary and accounting rules particularly concerning improved evaluation of the social contributions charged to the salaries of civil servants.The international indicator is shown in dollar-equivalents converted using the purchasing power parities which are currency exchange rates used as a common reference for expressing the purchasing power of different currencies.

17expenditure on primary education01 Expenditure on primary education


19�0 1990 2000 200� 2007DEE for primary education *in current prices (billions of ¤) 8.3 18.3 28.6 34.8 35.9 in 2007 prices (billions of ¤) 19.7 24.3 33.1 35.7 35.9 Proportion of DEE (%) 28.9 26.9 27.2 28.5 2�.5 Average expenditure per pupil *

in 2007 prices (¤) 2,780 3,550 4,990 5,320 5,350 Structure of initial funding (in %) **State 53.2 52.9

of which MEN 52.5 52.3Regional authorities 40.1 40.4Other public administrations and CAF 1.7 1.7Companies 0.0 0.0Households 5.0 5.0

(*) The reassessment of the DEE (see methodology indicator 01) applies to the whole of the 1980-2007 period.Average spending per pupil were reassessed only after 1999.(**) The structure of initial funding for primary education was reassessed as from 2003.Source: MEN-DEPP

03 Expenditure on primary education (in 2007 prices) taking into account the average duration and costs of education in 1990 and 2007

1990 2007

in euros in % in euros in %

Pre-primary 10,200 34.2 15,910 36.4

Primary 19,600 65.8 27,760 63.6

Total 29,�00 100.0 43,�70 100.0

Source: MEN-DEPP

Source: MEN-DEPP

2 000

2 500

3 000

3 500

4 000

4 500

5 000

5 500

€6 000

Primary education

Pre-primary

02 Evolution of average expenditure per pupil in 2007 prices (1980-2007)

Primary

This graph shows two breaks in series: in 1999, a break due to the restructuring of the Education Accounts (Metropolitan France + DOM); in 2006, a break due to modifications in the State’s budgetary and accounting rules (LOLF).

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007

3,320

2,7702,780

5,440

4,970

5,350


0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000

Average expenditure per primary pupilPublic and private, in dollar-equivalents (2005)

9,160

7,530

6,830

6,740

6,360

6,270

6,250

5,990

5,560

5,500

5,370

5,010

United StatesSweden

Italy*Japan

United KingdomNetherlands

Average for OECD countriesAustralia

FinlandSpain

FranceGermany

* Public only

1�


Enrolment in primary education has experienced three major changes over the past three deca-

des: the development of schooling prior to the age of 6, a drop in numbers due to demographic decline and the proportion of pupils “behind schedule” and an overall improvement in enrolment conditions for children in primary education.

In nursery school, the enrolment of 5-year-olds, and subsequently, 4-year-olds, gradually became more widespread during the ‘60s and ‘70s. Enrolment in school at the age of 3 is now the norm (except in French Guiana), which is not the case for 2-year-olds where enrolment often depends on the number of places available and therefore, the progression of the 2-5 year-old population. After remaining stable at nearly a third since the ‘80s, the rate of enrolment for 2-year-olds has been falling over the past few years (graph 01) as a result of a distinct demographic reco-very since 2000: it was 20.9% at the beginning of the 2007 academic year.

In primary as in nursery school, in both the public and private sectors, pupils have been advantaged by a considerable reduction in the average size of clas-ses. Numbering nearly 40 pupils until the beginning of the ‘70s, nursery school classes have gradually dropped to around 26. The phenomenon is a little less visible in primary schools: from around 30 pupils in the ‘60s and 26 at the beginning of the ‘70s, the ave-rage size is now down to less than 23 pupils.

Moreover, this change is concurrent with a reduc-tion in the number of schools from 68,000 in 1980 and

64,000 in 1990 to 55,300 at the beginning of the 2007 academic year due to the disappearance of multigra-de rural schools (4,300 in 2007 compared to more than 11,000 in 1980) and the grouping together or merger of nursery and primary schools. The tendency is thus to a modification in the distribution of schools accor-ding to the number of classes they comprise, “upgra-ding” them: less schools with 4 classes or less and more with 5 classes or more (graph 02).

Maintaining or even increasing the numbers of tea-ching staff even though the number of pupils was fal-ling had led to a continuous improvement of the ratio of teachers per 100 pupils (P/E) which came to an end as from the beginning of the 2003 academic year. After reaching a maximum of 5.37, the ratio fell back to 5.33 in 2006 before reaching 5.34 in 2007 (graph 03). In primary education, international comparisons are based on the reverse ratio, or the average number of pupils per teacher. Significantly different depending on the country, in 2006 this figure was close to 27 in Korea and 20 in the United Kingdom; at 19.3 in France, it was much lower in Belgium, Sweden and Italy.

With the demographic decline, there has been a distinct improvement in enrolment conditions for children in nursery and primary schools. However, primary education now has to deal with the consequences of a growth in birth rate since 2000.

Source: MEN-DEPP-DGESCOChamp : Metropolitan France and Metropolitan France + DOM, public and public + private, MEN

The rates of enrolment by age group show school populations by year in relation to the numbers of the corresponding generations registered or estimated by INSEE. Thus the enrolment rate of 2-year-olds in 2007 is estimated at 20.9%. Since only children turned 2 before the start of the academic year are eligible for enrolment, this means that nearly a third of children born between 1/1/2005 and 31/8/2005 were in fact enrolled for the 2007 academic year. Due to the administrative strike of some primary-school directors, data published have not been updated in detail since the start of the 2000 academic year. Data on numbers and enrolment rates may be subject to caution given this lack of precision. With the help of district national education inspectors, sets of data at departmental level have nevertheless been collected at the start of the past few school years.

1�education and enrolment conditions in primary education

Source: MEN-DEPP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100%

01 Enrolment rate of children aged 2, 3, 4 and 5 (1970-2007)

Metropolitan France

1970 74 78 82 86 90 94 98 02 200772 76 80 84 88 92 96 00 04

Aged 5 Aged 4

Aged 2

Aged 3

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

1 2 3 4 5 6 to 10 11 to 15 over 15

1999-00 2007-08Number of schools

Number of classes

02 Distribution of schools according to number of classes

Metropolitan France + DOM, public and private sectors

Source: MEN-DEPP


Source: MEN-DGESCO

5.00

5.10

5.20

5.30

5.40

5.50

03 Evolution in the “number of teachers per 100 pupils” ratio in public-sector primary education (1995-2007)

1995 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 2007


Average number of pupils per teacher in primary education (2006)

26.7

19.8

19.3

19.2

18.7

15.3

15.0

14.6

14.2

12.6

12.1

10.7

0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0 15.0 18.0 21.0 24.0

KoreaUnited Kingdom

FranceJapan

GermanyNetherlands

FinlandUnited States-

SpainBelgiumSweden

Italy

19


E valuation in experimental sciences at the end of primary school carried out in June 2007 was in-

tended to assess to what extent the objectives set by the 2002 programmes had been met.

It concerned the expectations of the programme and its aim was therefore not only to provide information on the pupils’ knowledge (concepts and vocabulary) but also on the skills they had developed (reasoning, identification, etc.). This evaluation concerned Phy-sics - “Matter”, “Earth and the skies”, “The man-made world” – and Life and Earth Sciences – “Unity and diversity of living things”, “The human body and health education”.

Year 6 pupils were classified into six groups depen-ding on their performance levels.

Nearly a quarter of the pupils (groups 4 & 5) obtai-ned scores indicating that they had acquired what was expected of them by the end of primary school. These pupils demonstrated a sharp understanding of statements out of context in addition to the capa-city to anticipate and analyse. They were capable of complex processing.

At the other end of the scale, 15% of the pupils (groups 0 &1) did not master the expected skills at the end of primary education. Among these, 13% were successful in questions with a visual aid and were able to answer questions linked to observation or practical elements of daily life. The remaining 2% did not master any of the knowledge or skills expec-ted at the end of primary school even though they

were occasionally able to answer some questions.

Between these two extremes, we find two other groups. Pupils in group 2 (31%) answered questions with simple instructions on the basis of matching words. They were beginning to use specific voca-bulary.

Pupils in group 3 (31%) reached a first level of conceptualisation. They were able to process or-ganised data and had acquired skills in identifying clues.

Pupils’ performances were very different depending on their previous education and their orientation at the end of Year 6. About a quarter of the pupils who had never repeated a year or who were eligible for admission in Year 7 belonged to groups 4 & 5 and were proficient in all the skills expected at the end of primary education. On the contrary, 80% of the pupils who stayed down in primary education and 94% of pupils who were to repeat their Year 6 were in group 0, 1 or 2. It could be assumed that 43% of the pupils in these groups entering Year 7 would find experimen-tal sciences in lower secondary rather problematic.

A little over half Year � pupils are more or less proficient in the knowledge and competencies expected of the programme.The others have problems in using their knowledge and analysing information. Among these, 15% are in difficulty.

Coverage: Metropolitan France, public and private-under-contract sectors

A national sample representative of schools and pupils enrolled in YEAR 6 was taken from the statistics concerning public and private-under-contract schools in Metropolitan France (1999-2000 database, completed by those for 2004-2005, 2005-2006 or 2006-2007 when the information was available, given that the 2006-2007 database was incomplete due to the administrative strike of school directors). 4,127 pupils, 226 classes and 154 schools were concerned by this assessment. The scale of performance was developed based on the answer-to-item statistical model. The average score corresponding to the average performance of pupils in the sample was determined by construction at 250 and its standard deviation at 50. This average is not a threshold corresponding to the minimum skills required. This assessment was carried out based on a methodology complying with the current “international standards” used in the PISA and PIRLS comparative surveys managed respectively by OECD and IEA. Since the skills assessed at the end of primary and lower secondary education are different, there is no common element enabling comparison of the two evaluations. This scale cannot be reasonably compared to that of indicator 26.

19skills acquired in experimental sciences by the end of primary education

01 May 2007 evaluation: distribution of pupils according to performance in experimental sciences

Source: MEN-DEPP

Interpretation: the horizontal bar represents the increasing range of skills mastered from groups 0 to 5.Pupils in group 2 represent 30.9% of the pupils. They are capable of performing group 0, 1, and 2 tasks.There is a very slight probability that they could accomplish group 3, 4 and 5 tasks. The weakest pupil in group 2 scores 212 and the best, 237.

Scale of scores from 116 to 370 points% pupils

Physics: pupils are capable of analysing complex documents: multiple variables and variety of codes. These pupils, proficient in a specific vocabulary, are capable of calling simultaneously upon cultural and educational (mathematics, science) skills. Life and Earth Sciences: these pupils demonstrate their ability to answer questions concerning the vegetable world. A global vision of the characteristics of living things may be observed, including specific organs e.g. for vegetables (dissemination). In general, the principles of how living things function (physiology of organisms) are fully understood.

Physics: this group of pupils is characterised by language skills giving them a sharp understanding of statements completely outside any personally-experienced context and the ability to interpret a drawing or graph to deduce new information. They have specific reading skills. What is more, they are able to analyse experimental situations by calling upon the knowledge they have in the field. Life and Earth Sciences: the pupils demonstrate their capacity to answer questions concerning the vegetable world, usually with the help of images which do not however guarantee that they understand the associated concepts. Their perception of the characteristics of living things remains fragmentary; usually only the organism considered as a whole is living. While the human body is correctly recognized from the point of view of anatomy, its physiological aspects are not always understood.

Physics: the pupils have a certain amount of knowledge in all the fields of “Matter”, “Earth and the skies”, “The man-made world”. They have difficulty in linking a concept with the appropriate vocabulary in the fields of “Earth and the skies” and “The man-made world”. They generally have a better command of the concepts than the vocabulary. The first level of conceptualisation is acquired: the pupils are capable of linking different elements of knowledge coherently. In the fields of “Earth and the skies” and “Matter”, the syllabus knowledge in general is acquired. Life and Earth Sciences: these pupils know how to process organised data (tables and graphs) even without indicators to structure their interpretation. Their identifications are efficient, whether simple or complex, enabling successful analysis ensuring the right answers.

Physics: these pupils answer questions based on simple instructions referring to a context or aids which are only slightly abstract (Christmas tree, near-balance position of the swing, switch, web page...). They know how to associate the names of three seasons with the three respective periods of the year. Their knowledge of how shadows are formed is sparse, anchored in reality. Basic educational knowledge is demonstrated by their use of a specific vocabulary (e.g. solstice). They have difficulty in linking the concept to the appropriate vocabulary.Life and Earth Sciences: everything basically linked to vocabulary (link between a word and its definition) seems to be acquired. A few concepts are understood mainly when they concern the animal world. The rare successful ventures into the vegetable world are based more on ordinary than scientific vocabulary.

Physics: the pupils successfully answer questions with a visual aid if this latter is based on widely-used images which they know. They are occasionally capable of answering questions concerning elements linked to everyday life (thermometer, compass, scales, evaporation, length of a day).Life and Earth Sciences: these pupils successfully answer questions with a visual aid if this latter is based on images which they know. They use ordinary vocabulary or make reference to simple notions.

These pupils do not master any of the knowledge or skills expected at the end of primary school even though they were very occasionally able to answer some questions.

Group 510.0 %

Group 413.1 %

Group 331.0 %

Group 230.9 %

Group 112.6 %

Group 0 2.4 %

116 2 8 7 3 7 0

116 2 8 72 6 2 3 7 0

116 3 7 0

116 2 1 2 2 3 7 3 7 0

116 2 1 21 8 7 3 7 0

116 1 8 7 3 7 0

2 3 7 2 6 2 3 7 0

02 Distribution of pupils per same-level group according to syllabus in primary school, in 2007

0

20

40

60

80

100%

Total

Stay do

wn in c

ycle 1

or 2 (

11.8%

)

Stay do

wn in c

ycle 3

(4.6%

)

No stay

ing do

wn or

shorte

ning o

f cycl

e

(80.4%

)

Shorte

ning o

f cycl

e

(3.2%

)

Group 0Group 1

Group 2Group 3

Group 4Group 5

Source: MEN-DEPP

Interpretation: 4.6% of pupils stayed down in cycle 3.Among these 44.5% are in group 2.

2020


The PIRLS survey designed to assess “reading literacy” is aimed at pupils in their fourth year

of compulsory schooling whatever their educational path. When they take the exam, French CM1 (Year 5) pupils are aged 10.

For this assessment as a whole, France is above the average for the 45 countries participating in the survey which is set at 500: French pupils scored 522 on average (graph 01). Girls had better results than boys: as in 2001, there was a difference of 11 points.

But when compared to the average results for the different groups of countries close to France from a geographical or economical point of view, French re-sults are then below average, be it in relation to the 21 European Union countries (536) or the 18 OECD member countries (535) participating in the review (table 2).

In 2001, France’s overall score was 525 and in 2006, 522. This small difference is insignificant. Between the two periods, an 8-point drop was observed in pu-blic-sector results, excluding ZEP (priority education zones). On the contrary, private school pupils scored better in 2006 (+11 points). With respect to priority education, results remained stable (table 3).

If all the European pupils who participated in PIRLS are ranked according to their score and this set is then divided into four equal groups, we observe that French pupils are over-represented in the weakest group (32% compared to 25% at the European level)

and on the contrary, under-represented in the stron-gest group (17% compared to 25%; graph 04).

This assessment is based on two types of question: multiple choice questions (MCQ) and open-ended ones. French pupils’ scores are significantly better when answering MCQs (68%) than when they have to write essays (52%). When questions call for a written answer, the more detailed the answer requi-red, the weaker the French pupils’ score. This phe-nomenon is to be observed in all countries but it is more marked in France.

The proportion of unanswered questions for French pupils is 2% for MCQs, 10% for open-ended ques-tions and even 16% for questions requiring the lon-gest answers; this is the highest percentage among European countries.

Just as in 2001, we observe that French pupils ques-tioned on their perception of their reading abilities underestimated themselves in relation to their coun-terparts in other countries: France is ranked 42nd out of 45 countries which is a long way off its actual ranking concerning performance.

The ranking of French CM1 (Year 5) pupils is average in the international 200� PIRLS survey. However France is below average when compared with European countries only. In relation to the previous study in 2001, French pupils’ performance is stable.

Source: IEA-PIRLS/MEN-DEPPCoverage: France excluding Reunion and TOM (overseas territories, public and private-under-contract sectors

The national sample comprises 4,404 pupils from 169 primary schools. It takes into account the size of schools and sector. At the international level, the sample concerns 215,137 pupils in 7,629 schools. The PIRLS (Progress in International Literacy study) survey is managed by IEA, a research association based in Hamburg. 45 countries and provinces participated in this assessment: Belgium (Flemish), Belgium (French), Bulgaria, Canada – provinces of Alberta, British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Quebec, Denmark, England, France, Georgia, Germany, Hong-Kong, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Italy, Kuwait, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Macedonia, Morocco, Moldavia, New Zealand, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Russian Federation, Scotland, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Trinity & Tobago, United States. To ensure test comparability over time, the 2006 assessment reused texts and questions from PIRLS 2001. The scale of performance was developed based on the answer-to-item statistical model. The average score corresponding to the pupils’ average performance was determined by interpretation at 500 and its standard deviation at 100. This average is not a threshold corresponding to the minimum skills required.

2020PIRLS 200�: reading skills of pupils in CM1 (Year 5)

02 Groups of countries close to France

Average total score

European Union in 2007 (21 out of 27 countries) 536

OECD countries (18 out of 30) 535

France 522Source: IEA-PIRLS, MEN-DEPP

03 Average overall scores per type of school

Type of school 2001 200�

Public excl. ZEP 533 525

Private 527 536

Public ZEP 477 478

Total 525 522Source: IEA-PIRLS, MEN-DEPP

25

14

17

18

18

27

30

32

36

25

29

23

23

23

20

25

27

28

25

32

30

28

25

22

21

24

22

25

25

31

31

34

32

24

17

14

0% 25 50 75 100

European Union

Netherlands

Sweden

Germany

Italy

England

Scotland

France

Spain

1st quartile 2nd quartile 3rd quartile 4th quartile

04 Distribution of pupils per quartile of achievement observed in European Union

Source: IEA-PIRLS, MEN-DEPP

0 100 200 300 400 500

South Africa

Morocco

Kuwait

Qatar

Indonesia

Iran

Macedonia

Georgia

Romania

Norway

PIRLSAverage

Belgium (Fr)

Spain

Poland

France

Slovenia

Scotland

Slovakia

Quebec

Austria

England

United States

Belgium (Fl)

Germany

Netherlands

Sweden

Hungary

Italy

Luxemburg

Hong-Kong

Russia

Source: IEA-PIRLS, MEN-DEPP

01 Pupils’ performance in various countries participating in the 2006 PIRLS survey

304

326

333

356

407

423

444

472

491

499

500

501

513

520

522

522

528

531

533

539

540

540

547

548

548

550

551

552

558

564

565

21


In 2007, France dedicated 53.0 billion euros to se-condary education (teaching and associated acti-

vities) i.e. 42.3% of the domestic expenditure on edu-cation compared to 44.9% in 1980. After remaining stable at the beginning of the ‘90s, this percentage rose slightly between 1996 and 2001 and has decli-ned over the past few years.

Total expenditure on secondary education in constant prices rose by 74% between 1980 and 2007 i.e. 2.1% per year. The rise in expenditure per pupil may be estimated at 63% (taking into account the 1999 and 2006 breaks in series). This rise which is less substantial than in primary education was the outcome, especially in the ‘90s, of both an improve-ment in teachers’ careers where the number of agré-gés (teachers holding the agrégation) and certifiés (other qualified teachers) significantly increased (cf. indicator 03) and the decentralisation laws. For the departments and regions participated massively in secondary education expenditure following transfer of the budgets for apprenticeship, school transports (from 1984), operating collèges (lower secondary) and lycées (upper secondary) in1986 and fitting out these schools with the necessary equipment (gra-dually, as from 1986).

As from 2006, a new wave of decentralisation was carried out with the transfer of public-sector collège and lycée TOS staff to the regions and departments in addition to the corresponding share of boarding costs for private secondary schools under contract. The regional authorities were to fund these new res-ponsibilities through taxation (allocation of a propor-

tion of TIPP* and TSCA*). They thus ensured 18.1% of the initial funding in 2007. The DEE for secondary education now amounts to only 69.7% funded by the State which covers costs for practically all staff (with the exception of TOS).

International comparisons of the average expen-diture per pupil show that the cost of secondary education in France remains relatively high at about 8,930 dollar-equivalents in 2005 compared to 7,800 on average for the OECD countries.

In 2007, a lower secondary pupil cost 7,930 euros, an upper secondary pupil in the general or technologi-cal stream cost 10,240 euros and in vocational edu-cation, 10,740 euros.

The cost of schooling which begins at the age of three and leads 15 years later to a general or tech-nological baccalauréat without repeating a year was evaluated at 104,570 euros in 2007 compared to 73,890 euros in 1990 (in 2007 prices) representing an increase of 42%. Schooling leading to a vocational baccalauréat in 16 years was evaluated at 116,790 euros i.e. an increase of 36% since 1990.

*TIPP: taxe de consommation intérieure des produits pétroliers (domestic tax on petroleum products);TSCA: taxe spéciale sur les contrats d’assurance (special tax on insurance contracts).

In 2007, France dedicated 53.0 billion euros to secondary education i.e. 32.4% of the domestic expenditure on education.Since 19�0, the average expenditure per pupil has increased by �3% in constant prices to reach �,�70 euros in 2007.

Source: MEN-DEPPFor international comparisons: OECDCoverage: Metropolitan France + DOM, all

Amounts for the most recent year’s expenditure are draft figures. Expenditure on primary education includes total expenditure on public and private-sector schools in Metropolitan France and the DOM linked to education and associated activities: canteens and boarding houses, administration, guidance, school health structures, school supplies, school transport, remuneration of education staff in training, etc., for the section related to primary education. This expenditure is assessed each year by the Compte de l’éducation (Education Account), a satellite account of the Compatbilité nationale (National Accounts). In 1999, these accounts were restructured; three major changes were introduced:- DOM (overseas departments) were included- social charges linked to staff salaries were reassessed- household expenses were reassessed.As from 2006, the Constitutional bylaw on budget acts (LOLF) modified State budgetary and accounting rules particularly concerning improved evaluation of the social contributions charged to the salaries of civil servants.The international indicator is shown in dollar-equivalents converted using the purchasing power parities which are currency exchange rates used as a common reference for expressing the purchasing power of different currencies.

21expenditure on secondary education01 Expenditure on secondary education (including secondary level apprenticeship*)


19�0 1990 2000 200� 2007DEE for secondary education*in current prices (billions of ¤) 12.8 30.7 46.8 52.7 53.0 in 2007 prices (billions of ¤) 30.5 40.9 54.2 54.0 53.0 Proportion of DEE (%) 44.9 45.2 44.7 43.3 42.3 Average expenditure per student* in 2007 prices (¤)

5,560 6,810 8,780 8,950 �,�70

Structure of initial funding (in %) **State 72.3 �9.7

dont MEN 67.2 64.6Regional authorities 15.6 1�.1Other public administrations and CAF 2.0 2.0Companies 1.8 1.9Households 8.3 �.2

(*) The reassessment of the DEE (see methodology indicator 01) applies to the whole of the 1980-2007 period.Average spending per pupil were reassessed only after 1999.(**) The structure of initial funding for secondary education was reassessed as from 2003.Source: MEN-DEPP

03 Theoretical expenditure on a few typical schooling cycles without repeats (in 2007 prices in euros)

Typical schooling cycleTotal

duration

Total expenditure (in 2007 prices)

1990 2007

BEP 2 yrs. 14 yrs. 68,880 95,310

General and technological baccalauréat 15 yrs. 73,890 104,570

Vocational baccalauréat 16 yrs. 85,810 116,790

Source: MEN-DEPP

Source: MEN-DEPP

Upper secondaryLower secondary

Upper secondary general and technologicalUpper secondary vocational


02 Evolution of average expenditure per secondary pupil in 2007 prices (1980-2007)

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

7 000

8 000

9 000

10 000

11 000

¤12 000

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007

10,740

7,360

10,240

5,560

8,870

6,830

7,930

5,280


Average expenditure on a secondary pupilPublic and private, in dollar-equivalents (2005)

* Public only

10,390

8,930

8,410

8,200

7,910

7,800

7,740

7,650

7,640

7,320

7,210

7,170

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000United States

FranceAustraliaSweden

JapanAverage for OECD countries

NetherlandsItaly*

GermanyFinland

SpainUnited Kingdom

22


Between 1994 and 2006, secondary education in general lost a little over 300,000 young people

representing a drop of 5% concerning pupils only, not apprentices. This tendency was particularly mar-ked at the beginning of the 2000 academic year when numbers fell by more than 50,000 pupils. Following less significant drops in the subsequent years, the fall has once again become significant since the start of the 2004 academic year, essentially due to demographic factors which impact collège (lower secondary) numbers first (graph 01).

The fall in secondary education numbers is also a re-sult of the sharp drop in repeat years at all levels: pu-pils beginning their secondary education at a youn-ger age finish more rapidly. This phenomenon does not however mean that there are fewer pupils conti-nuing their lower or upper secondary education. For nearly all those entering Year 7 continue to Year 10 and with little change over the past few years, 70% reach baccalauréat level (indicator 24).

At the end of collège, the paths followed by pupils have changed very little since 1996. About 750,000 pupils finish a Year 10 each year: six out of ten begin general or technological upper secondary education the following academic year and four out of ten, a vocational option. Most of those continuing their upper secondary education in general or technolo-gical streams do so in a public-sector lycée. Among those who continue with an upper secondary voca-tional option, a little over half enrol in a public-sector vocational lycée, with the others opting for courses

with education or apprenticeship status in private or agricultural vocational schools (table 02).

The paths taken at the end of CAP-BEP have under-gone more change. Since 1996, roughly half the some 320,000 young people finishing their final year of CAP or BEP continue their education: but they aim more and more frequently for a vocational baccalauréat or brevet rather than entering a première d’adaptation (Year 12 preparatory class) to prepare a technologi-cal baccalauréat (table 03).

Half the pupils finishing their secondary education in Year 13 prepare a general, 28% a technological and 20% a vocational baccalauréat. Since 1996, the pro-portion of general-stream Year 13 classes, particu-larly the arts options, shows a tendency to decrease to the advantage of vocational streams where there is a growing number of students enrolling in agricul-tural lycées and apprenticeship centres, especially in the production sector (table 04).

Since 1994, numbers in secondary education have fallen by a little over 300,000 pupils due to the reduced number of repeat years or the size of generations. Half the pupils enrolled in Year 13 prepare a general baccalauréat.

Source: MEN-DEPPCoverage: Metropolitan France, all initial education programmes

Data for this indicator concern secondary education in general and include the training delivered in MEN schools, in agricultural institutions and apprentice training centres. The last available detailed data related to all these options concern the 2006-07 academic year.

22enrolment in secondary education

02 Evolution in study options at end of general, technological, integration, special needs or agricultural college Year 10

9�-97 01-02 03-04 05-0� 0�-07

Finish Year 10 (in thousands) 747 744 751 755 751

Probability of entering Year 10 after entering Year 7 96 98 99 100 100

Opt for a vocational upper secondary cycle 40.� 40.4 40.0 40.7 40.5

CAP-BEP in a public-sector vocational lycée 24 23 23 23 23

CAP-BEP in a private-sector vocational lycée 6 6 6 6 6

CAP-BEP in an agricultural lycée 3 3 3 4 4

CAP-BEP in an apprentice training centre 7 8 8 8 8

Opt for a general or techno. upper secondary cycle 5�.2 5�.5 5�.� 5�.4 5�.4

Opt for Year 11 in public-sector lycée 45 46 46 46 46

Opt for Year 11 in private-sector lycée 12 11 12 12 12

Opt for Year 11 in agricultural lycée 1 1 1 1 1

Leave school in Year 10 1 1 1 1 1

Total 100 100 100 100 100

Interpretation: of the 751,000 pupils still enrolled in Year 10 in June 2006, 58.4% continued in general or technological upper secondary education in the 2005-2006 school year, 40.5% in vocational upper secondary and less than 1% left school.Source: MEN-DEPP

03 Evolution of study options after a CAP-BEP

9�-97 01-02 03-04 05-0� 0�-07

Number of pupils finishing their final year of CAP or BEP (in thousands) 314 331 322 324 319

Proportion continuing with a vocational baccalauréat or brevet as either student or apprentice 35 37 39 42 41

Proportion continuing in general or technological upper secondary 14 12 11 9 8

Proportion leaving school at CAP-BEP level 51 51 50 49 51

Interpretation: of the 319,000 pupils still enrolled in the final year of CAP or BEP in June 2006, half began to work and the other half continued their education in the 2006-2007 school year: 8% enrolled in a première d’adaptation (Year 12 preparatory class) and 41% in a vocational baccalauréat or brevet.Source: MEN-DEPP

04 Evolution in number of pupils enrolled in Year 13 in relation to baccalauréat type

199� 2001 200�

Numbers % Numbers % Numbers %

General bac options 342,22� 5�.� 31�,5�3 52.2 317,473 52.0

- S (including agricultural) 160,552 47 158,962 50 158,598 50

- L 87,427 26 59,723 19 57,947 18

- ES 94,247 28 97,878 31 100,928 32

Technological bac options 173,404 2�.� 1�3,24� 30.2 171,37� 2�.1

- STG 88,127 51 97,485 53 87,091 51

- STI 46,824 27 46,195 25 42,077 25

- SMS 19,829 11 22,100 12 24,768 14

- STL 7,335 4 7,277 4 7,815 5

- Other MEN techno 4,740 3 3,132 2 2,946 2

- Agricultural 6,549 4 7,057 4 6,679 4

Vocational bac options ��,�75 14.4 10�,740 17.� 121,9�4 20.0

- Production : 37,508 43 51,813 49 61,505 50

apprenticeship 4,667 5 10,566 10 13,001 11

agricultural 622 1 7,975 7 12,890 11

- Services : 49,367 57 54,927 51 60,459 50

apprenticeship 3,522 4 5,898 6 7,418 6

Total �02,505 100.0 �0�,549 100 �10,�13 100

Interpretation: the percentages in bold type indicate a given line’s share in the overall total; the other percentages show a given line’s share in the overall numbers of the type of baccalauréat in question (general, technological or vocational). Thus, at the start of the 2006 school year, pupils in vocational Year 13 amounted to 20% of the total. Of these, 50% (all categories included) chose a production option or 11%, a production option based on apprenticeship.Source: MEN-DEPP

Source: MEN-DEPP (school going population) and INSEE (number of inhabitants estimate)

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

in thousands of pupils

01 Variations in overall secondary numbers due to demography and schooling

86-87

87-88

88-89

89-90

90-91

91-92

92-93

93-94

94-95

95-96

96-97

97-98

98-99

99-00

00-01

01-02

02-03

03-04

04-05

05-06

06-07

Interpretation: secondary education numbers (including apprentices and agricultural schools) fell by 54,000 pupils at the start of the 2007 school year compared to 2006. The variation in enrolment rates was due to a drop of 7,000 pupils while the less sizeable generations caused a decrease of 47,000 pupils.

Variation in enrolment ratesDemographic impact

0123

Pupils in French secondary schools enjoy stu-dent-to-teacher ratios which are rather better

than those in comparable countries. In 2006, the ove-rall student-to-teacher ratio is around 11.9 in France compared to 15 in Germany and the Netherlands, the United States or Korea but around 10 in Belgium, Spain and Italy. It has shown a tendency to decrease with the drop in numbers of pupils enrolled in collège and lycées due to demographic decline.

However, this indicator only gives a rough idea of the actual conditions in which pupils attend school which is usually evaluated in secondary education on the basis of the average number of pupils per en-tire class (P/C). The average size of classes varies enormously between levels and in different educa-tion cycles and over the past two decades, there have been somewhat contrasting changes, less advantageous than in primary education. Thus, the large influx of pupils born during the high-birthrate generations resulted in increased numbers in prima-ry school classes and to an even greater extent, in upper secondary general and technological educa-tion at the end of the ‘80s: around 1990, lycée classes comprised nearly 30 pupils on average compared to a little over 24 in collèges, and a little under 23 in vocational lycées (public- and private-sector). While the situation remained relatively stable in collèges throughout the following years, there was a distinct improvement in the upper secondary situation due to demographic decline. In upper secondary general and technological education, the average class size is now back to less than 28 pupils and less than 20 in upper secondary vocational education (graph 01).

However, this information does not provide the true picture of actual teaching conditions given that about a third of teaching hours are currently dedicated to teaching in groups and not in whole classes: a little less than 20% in public-sector collèges and nearly half in lycées, including post-baccalauréat classes (table 02).

The E/S indicator of the “average number of pupils under a teacher’s responsibility for one hour on ave-rage” takes into account all teaching hours whether they are delivered to entire classes or to groups. In 2007, it was 21.0 pupils on average throughout pu-blic-sector secondary education: 22.8 in collège, 16.0 in vocational lycée and 22.7 in upper secondary ge-neral or technological education. These values are considerably lower than class sizes, especially in ly-cées and particularly in vocational education where nearly 20% of the hours take place with groups of 10 pupils or less (graph 03).

French secondary education enjoys good student-to-teacher ratios which have shown a tendency to improve during periods of demographic decline.There are 24 pupils per class on average in collèges. In lycées where classes following the general syllabus tend to be larger, half the teaching hours take place with smaller groups of pupils.

Source: the numbers of pupils per class and the number of classes are provided by the “Education” information system. The other data are the result of processing files taken from the “bases-relais” (satellite databases) organising information on pupils and teachers which are available for public-sector secondary schools (situation observed at the start of the 2007 school year).The regional special needs schools (établissements régionaux d’enseignement adapté – EREA) are not included.For international comparisons: OECDCoverage: Metropolitan France + DOM,public and private, public only


23school conditions in secondary education

Source: MEN-DEPP, satellite databases – Start 2007 school year

0

10

20

30

40

50

60%

<= 5 6 à 10 11 à 15 16 à 20 21 à 25 26 à 30 31 à 35 > 35pupilsStructure size

Collège Pré-bac lycée LP Total

03 Distribution teaching hours in relation to structure size and education type (2007)

Interpretation: 41.7% of hours in vocational lycées are delivered to structures numbering 11-15 pupils.

Metropolitan France + DOM, public


Average number of pupils per teacher in secondary education (2006)

18.2

15.8

15.2

15.1

13.7

13.7

12.9

12.6

11.9

10.7

10.5

9.9

KoreaNetherlands

United StatesGermany

United KingdomJapan

FinlandSweden

FranceItaly

SpainBelgium

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

02 Structure size per type of education, start of 2007 school year

Metropolitan France + DOM, public

Type of education

Number of pupils per class (P/C)

Average size

structures (E/S)

% hours in structures

<= 10 pupils

% hours in structures > 35 pupils

% hours in groups

Collège 23.9 22.8 3.2 0.4 18.6

SEGPA 13.3 12.6 30.5 0.1 25.7

Vocational lycée 19.4 16.0 19.0 0.2 47.1

Pre-bac lycée (*) 28.3 22.7 6.4 1.7 49.0

CPGE 35.6 27.8 8.8 33.1 46.4

STS 22.4 18.1 14.1 1.4 45.0

Total 23.� 21.0 �.5 1.1 33.4

(*) upper secondary general and technologicalSource: Education and satellite databases – Start 2007 school year

Source: MEN-DEPP

18.0

20.0

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

32.0

Lower secondaryUpper secondary vocational

Upper secondary general and technological

Metropolitan France + DOM, public + private

01 Evolution in the average number of pupils per class (1980-2007)

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007

24

W ith a progression of more than 4 points per year at the end of the ‘90s, the rate of access

to baccalauréat level rose from 34% in 1980 to 71% in 1994 (inclusive of all education options). After this all-time high linked to a sharp fall in Year 12 repeats, giving rise to a significant influx of pupils in Year 13, the rate then stabilised at around 70% (70.4% at the start of the 2007 school year throughout Metropoli-tan France and the DOM).

Concerning the schools coming under Ministry of Education authority only, the access rate peaked at close to 68% in 1994 before varying between 63 and 64% (63.5% in 2007). The proportion of young people reaching level IV by other means (agricultural school and apprenticeship) progressed regularly during the ‘90s and has slowed down slightly since: today, more than 4% of young people reach level IV through ap-prenticeship and a little under 3% by following agri-cultural education options.

After exceeding 40% at the start of the 1994 school year, the access rate at general baccalauréat level then fell back to around 34% up until 2003. At the start of the following school years, it slightly pro-gressed: 34.6% in 2004, 35.1% in 2005 and 2006 and 35.5% in 2007. At the same time, the technological stream which increased to nearly 22% until 2000 has since steadily declined: 19.9% in 2005, then 18.8% in 2006 and 18.6% in 2007. And finally, progression of the vocational stream which was strong until 1998 but slowed down considerably during the following years, has picked up over the past few years: it cur-rently attracts 16% of young people as opposed to

only 5% in 1990, in particular due to the development of vocational baccalauréat and brevet preparation through apprenticeship.

Girls reach baccalauréat level more often than boys. Despite a slight fall-off in recent years, their lead remains significant in 2007 at nearly 10 points, from 12 points in general stream Year 13 and 1.5 points in the technological streams. Concerning vocational streams, boys have a lead of nearly 4 points.

Exceeding 90% at the end of the ‘90s, the access rate to level V education then remained steady at around 92%. After briefly recovering in 1997 and 1998 as a re-sult of the collège reform, it has since varied around 93% (93.1% at the start of the 2007 school year).

Source: MEN-DEPPCoverage: Metropolitan France, Metropolitan France + DOM

Education levels group together education options deemed of a comparable level of qualification. A pupil who has enrolled at least once in an option of this type is said to have reached the corresponding level.Level V access takes into consideration pupils enrolled in general and technological stream Year 11 or in the final year of CAP or BEP at the beginning of the school year.Level IV access includes all pupils entering Year 13 in general, technological (including classes preparing for technical diplomas) or vocational streams in addition to apprentices in their final year of preparation for the vocational baccalauréat or brevet.The annual access rates at education level V and IV show the numbers of pupils reaching the corresponding level for the first time, broken down by year of birth, in relation to the total numbers of the generations they belong to. The indicator shown here, known as the annual or transverse rate, is the sum of these basic rates per age for the same school year. It is therefore different from the percentage of a generation accessing the level under consideration which is the sum of the same basic rates for all school years for this generation.Rates of access to baccalauréat level should not be confused with rates of obtaining the diploma, or percentage of baccalauréat-holders, which is shown in indicator 29.


The proportion of young people attaining level IV education has remained close to 70% for the past decade: the vocational study option now concerns more than 1�% of young people.Student access to level V education has varied between 92 and 94% since 1990, 9% entering through the apprenticeship system.

2401 Rate of access to education level V

(inclusive of all initial education options)

Metropolitan France Metropolitan France + DOM

19�0-�1 1990-91 2000-01 2005-0� 200�-07 2007-0�

Upper secondary general and techno-logical

39.5 56.0 56.3 56.8 56.9 57.2

CAP-BEP 40.9 36.5 36.6 36.1 36.0 35.9*

Total �0.4 92.5 93.1 92.9 92.� 93.1*

MEN 67.0 80.4 80.9 80.5 80.0 80.1

Agriculture 3.4 3.1 3.3 3.9 3.9 4.0

Apprenticeship 10.0 9.0 8.9 8.4 8.9 9.0*

* Numbers based on an estimate concerning education through apprenticeshipSource: MEN-MESR-DEPP

02 Rate of access to education level IV(inclusive of all initial education options)

Metropolitan France Metropolitan France + DOM

19�0-�1 1990-91 2000-01 2005-0� 200�-07 2007-0�

General bac 22.1 33.4 34.0 35.1 35.1 35.5

Technological bac 11.9 17.6 21.6 19.9 18.8 18.6

Vocational bac 0.0 5.0 14.0 15.2 16.3 16.3*

Total 34.0 5�.0 �9.� 70.2 70.2 70.4*

MEN 33.0 54.0 63.2 63.8 63.2 63.5

Agriculture 1.0 1.4 2.7 2.5 2.6 2.5

Apprenticeship 0.0 0.6 3.7 3.9 4.4 4.4*

* Numbers based on an estimate concerning education through apprenticeshipSource: MEN-MESR-DEPP

03 Rate of access to education level IV, according to stream and gender

Metropolitan France + DOM, 2007 school year

Girls Boys Total

General 41.6% 29.6% 35.5%

Technological 19.3% 17.9% 18.6%

Vocational* 14.5% 18.1% 16.3%

Total* 75.4% �5.�% 70.4%

* Numbers based on an estimate concerning education through apprenticeshipSource: MEN-DEPP

Source: MEN-DEPP

Metropolitan France

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70%

Level IV access: technological baccalauréat

Level IV access: general baccalauréat

Level V access: general and technological Year 11

04 Evolution in education level V and IV access rates General and technological stream (1980-2007)

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007

Source: MEN-DEPP

Metropolitan France

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45%

Level V access: vocational diplomas

Level IV access: vocational baccalauréat

* Numbers based on an estimate concerning education through apprenticeship

05 Evolution in education level V and IV access rates Vocational stream (1980-2007)

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007*

access to education levels IV and V

25

�0 I �1 The State of Education No. 18 [2008 edition]

The assessment of experimental science skills carried out in May 2007 aimed to assess the

skills acquired by pupils by the end of lower secon-dary education and contribute to guiding educatio-nal policy. Pupils were assessed on skills common to Life and Earth Sciences and Physics and Chemis-try and in line with syllabus content of the following programmes: “Knowledge”, “Applying knowledge”, “Applying a scientific approach” and “Presenting and processing data and results”

Year 10 pupils were classified into six groups depen-ding on their performance levels.

27% of pupils (groups 4 and 5) demonstrate detailed knowledge and compound skills. They are able to organise information from different documents in order to communicate it in an appropriate manner, using rich resources of specific language. They can also identify the demonstrable consequence of a hypothesis to set up a protocol, selecting the right experimental approaches. Among them, 10% (group 5) stand out due to their logical thinking, good com-mand of vocabulary and detailed knowledge.

At the other end of the scale, 15% of pupils (groups 0 and 1) have problems. They are able to call upon simple knowledge especially when it concerns so-mething concrete. They do not master concepts and cannot understand an abstract phenomenon. Among these, 2% are in very great difficulty: they are occa-sionally able to answer questions but are not profi-cient in any of the required skills.

Between these two extremes, pupils in group 2 (29%) know how to read documents using multiple media but are unable to analyse them, however. On the ba-sis of simple experimental situations, they arrive at conclusions without structured reasoning by picking out the studied variables. Pupils in group 3 (29%) are able to identify the meaning of variations in a graph; they can pick out data by combining the order of a more complex table’s columns and then process and interpret these data. It is only after acquiring profi-ciency at this level that pupils can interpret or un-derstand information taken from scientific sources. Pupils in this group can understand experimental setups, identify the factors they need to vary and un-derstand the protocol’s results.

Groups 3 and in particular 4 and 5 are overrepresen-ted in the category of pupils who want to continue in a general or technological Year 11. At the other end of the scale, groups 1 and 2 are overrepresented in the category choosing a vocational Year 11. Pupils contemplating a repeat year are to be found mostly in groups 2 and 3 (29.1% and 41.5%): this may be be-cause they feel their level is insufficient to move on up to lycée or they may be intending to target a fu-ture option more consistent with their desires.

�5% of pupils know how to identify and process data from all kinds of sources. 57% are also able to analyse these data and understand experimental protocols. 27% of pupils demonstrate detailed knowledge; 10% are familiar with all the characteristics of a scientific approach.

Source: MEN-DEPPCoverage: Metropolitan France, public and private-under-contract sectors

A representative national sample of pupils enrolled in general option Year 10 in public-sector and private-under-contract lower secondary education in Metropolitan France was set up. The sample included one or two complete classes within a same school. The sample was organised according to the size of collèges and the type of school attended. All together, 9,713 pupils in 199 collèges participated in the survey.

The scale of performance was developed based on the answer-to-item statistical model. The average score corresponding to the average performance of pupils in the sample was determined by construction at 250 and its standard deviation at 50. This average does not represent a threshold corresponding to the minimum skills required.

This assessment was carried out based on a methodology complying with the current “international standards” used in the PISA and PIRLS comparative surveys managed respectively by OECD and IEA.

Since the skills assessed at the end of primary and lower secondary education are different, there is no common element enabling comparison of the two evaluations and this scale should not be compared with that of indicator 19.

25skills acquired in experimental sciences by the end of lower secondary education

01 Distribution of pupils according to performance in experimental sciences at the end of collège (May 2007)

Source: MEN-DEPP

Scale of scores from 79 to 417 points Coverage: Metropolitan France, public and private-under-contract sectors

Group 510.0%

Group 416.8%

Group 329.2%

Group 229.0%

Group 112.9%

Group 02.1%

3 1 4 4 1 7

2 7 6

2 3 8 2 7 6

2 0 1 2 3 8

1 6 3 2 0 1

79 1 6 3

Interpretation: pupils in group 2 represent 29% of the pupils. The weakest pupil in this group scores 201 points and the best, 238 points. Pupils in this group are also capable of achieving tasks of group 1 and 0 levels.

These pupils are capable of choosing from several logics or approaches and demonstrating logical thinking particularly when dealing with identified information. They are proficient in the essential points of an experimental approach (hypothesis, concept of reference...).

The pupils know how to relate knowledge, models and data taken from different sources to explain a phenomenon or solve a problem. They are capable of selecting and interpreting the information to compare it to the expected results and/or a problem.They are capable of transposing theory to a situation in daily life concerning security. They are capable of calling on their knowledge to structure reasoning in response to a problem. Their proficiency in specific vocabulary linked to knowledge improves.

Pupils in this group use observation and/or results to express hypotheses and establish a causal relationship. They can organise useful information in order to process it. They can correctly use specific vocabulary enabling them to classify and interpret data.From this group up, pupils know how to use their knowledge in a context other than that of learning. The knowledge mastered by this group is already quite complex.

From this group up, pupils begin to understand a phase in the experimental approach: they are able to come to conclusions based on observed facts but cannot use logical reasoning.These pupils can process a text using their scientific knowledge and pick out useful information from various media (texts, photographs, diagrams, measuring apparatus, graphs, tables with 2 levels of identification) and compare it.

These pupils only supply occasional answers, they cannot be credited with any skills.

The pupils in this group only know how to pick out the variable factor in an experimental protocol when it is presented in a way familiar to them. In identifying data in a table, their skills are limited to a single level of identification, identifying a source of danger on the basis of a photo illustrating a scene in everyday life (e.g. risk of short circuit). They are able to use their knowledge when it is very similar to what they learn in class.

3 1 4

KnowledgeUse a scientific approachExpress and process data, resultsUsing knowledgeTotal

Source: MEN-DEPP

Interpretation: group 3 is successful with 69.3% of the items and 66.3% of those comprised in the “approach” skill.

02 Percentage of success per skill for pupils in each group

0% 20 40 60 80 100

Group 0

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Group 4

Group 5

Total

Source: MEN-DEPP

03 Distribution of pupils per same-level group according to desired study option

Interpretation: 21.8% of pupils wanting to move up into general and technological Year 11 belong to group 4 comprising 17.1% of the total number of pupils.

GT Year 11(70.1%)

Repeat(1.5%)

Voc. Year 11(22.1%)

Group 0Group 1

Group 2Group 3

Group 4Group 5

0% 20 40 60 80 100

Other(6.3%)

Total

2�


P ISA assessments measure and compare the knowledge and skills of 15-year-old pupils with

respect to reading, mathematical and scientific li-teracy. PISA provides an objective view of French pupils’ skills from the outside, showing their strong and weak points.

In 2006, scientific literacy was the core element of the assessment carried out in 57 countries, 30 of which were OECD countries. The knowledge to be assessed is determined not because it is part of the common denominator of national education pro-grammes but because PISA considers it to be fun-damental to scientific literacy. And so a third of the questions concern concepts which are not part of the syllabus in French schools.

Generally speaking, the scientific literacy scores of French pupils are close to those of OECD coun-tries: 495 for an overall average established at 500 (graph 02). French pupils are spread a little more wi-dely over the scientific literacy scale: they are less numerous (78.9%) than the average proportion of OECD pupils (80.7%) to reach level 2 which, in terms of PISA assessment, corresponds to the capacity to use skills and knowledge to deal with science- and technology-related problems in their future life. At the top end of the scale, 8% of them reach at least level 5 i.e. the difference with OECD countries (9%) is of little significance.

The PISA notion of scientific education is that it should provide both understanding of scientific concepts, based on knowledge of the natural world

acquired through studying the scientific disciplines, and scientific processes which concern the different aspects of scientific methods.

French pupils obtain contrasting results: the average score in scientific processes is 20 points higher than that of the scientific concept category. French pupils perform well when asked to reproduce knowledge but find it difficult to use this in daily-life situations outside the school context. With an average score of 57.5% compared to 53.3 % for OECD countries, they are more skilled in using and processing scientific data.

While a considerable difference may be observed in results of the various skills assessed, this survey nevertheless reveals that French pupils are better at scientific reasoning than actually applying their knowledge.

Concerning scientific literacy, which was then the main focus of PISA assessment for the first time, French pupils’ scores in 200� were consistent with the OECD average.

Source: PISA-OECD/MEN-DEPPCoverage: France excluding Reunion and TOM (overseas territories)

In March 2006, France participated along with 56 other countries (of which, 30 OECD) in the third phase of the PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) operation managed by OECD and carried out every three years. Implementation of the survey is based on standard procedures to guarantee the comparability of results. The items are translated into twenty different languages and submitted to pupils in every country. In France, the survey covered all the 15-year-old pupils (born in 1990) enrolled in schools under Ministry of Education (except EREA) and Ministry of Agriculture responsibility. The targeted population therefore covers 95% of the 15-year-old generation enrolled in lower or upper secondary education. In France, the survey concerns a sample of 187 schools. A maximum of thirty pupils is then randomly selected in each school.

2�PISA 200�: scientific skills of 15-year-old pupils01 Distribution of French pupils on the scale of performance in scientific literacy at the end of collège (May 2007)

Source: MEN-DEPP

Description of levels on PISA scientific literacy scale% population

Level 60.8%

Level 57.2%

Level 420.9%

Level 222.8%

Belowlevel 16.6%

7 0 81 4 6 7 9 3

7 9 36 6 3

5 5 9 6 6 3

4 1 0 4 8 4

3 3 5

Interpretation: the horizontal bar represents the increasing range of skills mastered from groups “below level 1” to 6. 27.2% of French pupils are in level 3. They are capable of performing level 3, 2, 1 and “below level 1” tasks. There is a very slight probability that they could accomplish level 4, 5 and 6 tasks. The weakest pupil in level 3 scores 484 and the best, 559.

Level 114.5%

Level 327.2%

7 0 8

4 8 4 5 5 9

3 3 5 4 1 0

1 4 6

1 4 6

1 4 6

1 4 6

1 4 6

7 9 3

7 9 3

7 9 3

7 9 3

7 9 31 4 6

Pupils are capable of identifying, explaining and using scientific data and processes in complex contexts. At this level, pupils use their scientific knowledge and develop approaches and strategies to formulate proposals and make decisions in situations concerning individuals, society or much wider contexts.

Pupils are capable of identifying scientific aspects in complex and varied situations, using both scientific concepts and processes in these situations and selecting, comparing and assessing scientific facts. They are also capable of giving explanations based on evidence and formulating a logical reasoning.

Pupils are capable of working on situations and questions presenting partially explicit scientific aspects and drawing conclusions concerning the role of science and technology. They are capable of applying scientific concepts directly to real-life situations, analysing the consequences of their actions and explaining their decisions using scientific knowledge or facts.

Pupils are capable of identifying explicit scientific problems in various contexts and selecting facts to explain scientific phenomena. They know how to interpret and apply scientific concepts in different areas and are able to formulate simple proposals on the basis of facts or make decisions based on scientific reasoning.

Pupils’ scientific knowledge is very limited and they can only very occasionally answer a few questions.

Pupils’ scientific knowledge is limited and they can only use it in certain situations familiar to them. They are capable of explaining obvious scientific phenomena on the basis of concrete facts.

When in a familiar context, pupils have enough scientific knowledge to supply plausible explanations of scientific phenomena, draw conclusions from simple scientific research and interpret results of scientific investigation, solutions found to solve technical problems.

Source: ?

Finland

CanadaJapanNew ZealandAustraliaNetherlandsKorea

Germany United KingdomCzech Republic Austria

Belgium IrelandHungarySwedenPolandDenmarkFrance

IcelandUSASlovakia Spain Norway

Luxemburg

ItalyPortugal

Greece

Turkey

Mexico

400

410

420

430

440

450

460

470

480

490

500

510

520

530

540

550

560

570

02 PISA 2006: OECD country results for scientific literacy

Interpretation: the line represents the OECD averageFor the sake of clarity, this graph only takes into consideration OECD Member countries. The countries with names in italics have results which are not significantly different from France’s. France is ranked on a par with Poland, Denmark, Iceland, the United States, Norway, Spain and Slovakia.

Switzerland

27


Between 1980 and 2007, the baccalauréat under-went a profound change: the annual number of

baccalauréat-holders more than doubled and their proportion in a given generation rose from a quar-ter in 1980 to a little over 64% in 2007 (graph 01). This progression was particularly marked from the mid-‘80s, when the vocational baccalauréat was created, to the mid-‘90s.

Since 1995 however, the proportion of baccalauréat-holders in a given generation has shown a tendency to stagnate, fluctuating around 62%, except for the last two sessions in 2006 and 2007 where this propor-tion rose to more than 64% with particularly high pass rates for the exam. Since baccalauréat candidates began preparing the new streams implemented in upper secondary education in 1995, the distribution of baccalauréat-holders has changed in favour of the vocational streams. The percentage of the lat-ter gained more than 6 points, reaching 20% in 2007. The technological baccalauréat lost 2 points (26.2% of successful candidates in 2007) and the general streams, more than 4 points (53.7% of successful candidates in 2007), with this decline due mainly to the literary stream (table 02). Given these conditions, the 64.2% share of the generation passing the bac-calauréat in 2007 was distributed as follows: 34.7% in a general stream, 16.8% in a technological stream and 12.8% in a vocational stream.

As for other exams, rates of success in the bacca-lauréat have also tended to rise regularly, with their slight increase over several decades being strongly confirmed since 1995. And so for the 2007 session,

this rate was over 83% for baccalauréats conside-red as a whole, compared to 75% in 1995. This rise is particularly visible concerning the general stream baccalauréat where the success rate over the past two years has yet again been noticeably higher than for the other streams: 87.8% for the 2007 session as against 75.1% in 1995. This improved success of candidates has tended to increase the proportion of young baccalauréat-holders per generation, particu-larly for the 2006 and 2007 sessions (graph 03).

While candidates’ social background has a conside-rable impact on distribution among general, techno-logical and vocational streams (indicator 11), it also impacts their chances of success in each of them. And so we observe that in 2007, more than 90% of children with parents in a managerial or teaching profession were successful in the general stream baccalauréat i.e. 10 points more than working-class children. They were also more successful in the tech-nological and vocational streams where farmers’ children show the highest success rate (table 04).

For the 2007 exam session, �4.2% candidates of the same generation obtained a baccalauréat. Since 1995, the proportion of general stream baccalauréat-holders has decreased in favour of the vocational streams.The success rate of 2007 session candidates was an all-time high, where the impact of social background was nevertheless still apparent.

Coverage: Metropolitan France or Metropolitan France + DOMSource: MEN-DEPP

Proportion of a generation holding the baccalauréat: This is the proportion of baccalauréat-holders in an imaginary generation of individuals where each age group would comply with the rates of candidacy and success observed for the year under consideration.The number is determined by calculating, for each age group, the ratio of the number of successful candidates to this age group’s total population and the total of these rates per age group. The age groups taken into consideration in this calculation are not the same for the general and technological as for the vocational streams, given that the syllabus of the latter is a year longer and enjoys a rather different distribution by age, particularly among the higher age groups. The calculations were made based on the INSEE demographic series integrating the results of annual population censuses (set up in 2004) present in the database in force at the end of March 2008.Success rate: This is obtained by calculating the ratio of successful candidates to the number sitting the exams. All candidates taking at least one paper are considered to have sat the exams.

27baccalauréat success rates

Source: MEN-DEPP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70%General Technological Vocational

Metropolitan France01 Proportions of baccalauréat-holders per generation (1980-2007)

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007

02 Distribution per stream of baccalauréat-holders in 1995 and 2007 sessions (%)


1995 session 2007 session

Successful Distribution Successful Distribution

General baccalauréat

ES 76,555 15.5 90,354 17.2

L 71,460 14.5 49,843 9.5

S 139,031 28.2 141,536 27.0

Total general streams 2�7,04� 5�.3 2�1,733 53.7

Technological baccalauréat

STI 35,217 7.2 34,197 6.5

STG (ex-STT) 78,894 16.0 68,519 13.1

SMS 13,337 2.7 19,730 3.8

Other technological streams 10,819 2.2 15,159 2.9

Total technological streams 13�,2�7 2�.1 137,�05 2�.2

Vocational baccalauréat

Production 26,218 5.3 47,245 9.0

Services 40,878 8.3 57,730 11.0

Total vocational streams �7,09� 13.� 104,975 20.0

Total baccalauréat 492,409 100.0 524,313 100.0Source: MEN-DEPP

04 2007 success rates per social background (%)Metropolitan France + DOM

General bac

Techno. bac

Vocational bac Total

Farmers 90.9 87.0 85.9 89.1

Skilled craftsmen, merchandisers, businessmen 87.8 82.2 81.5 85.0

Managers, higher-level intellectual prof. 92.5 84.4 83.0 90.4

of which teachers and equivalent 93.5 84.9 83.4 91.9

Intermediary professions 88.7 82.1 81.7 86.0

of which primary school teachers and equivalent 92.6 84.3 79.4 90.4

Employees 86.2 80.0 80.7 83.2

Working class 82.6 78.0 78.5 79.8

Retired 84.3 75.0 73.3 78.1

Others with no professional status 79.3 72.6 70.2 74.9

Total �7.7 79.3 7�.5 �3.4Source: MEN-DEPP

03 Evolution in success rates for 1995 and 2007 baccalauréat sessionsMetropolitan France + DOM

Source: MEN-DEPP (OCEAN)

70

72

74

76

78

80

82

84

86

88

90%

1995 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 2007

General baccalauréat Technological baccalauréatVocational baccalauréatTotal baccalauréat

2�

�� I �7 The State of Education No. 18 [2008 edition]

Ease of school-to-work transition for newly-qua-lified young people depends on labour market

vitality both in France and in most other European countries. Nearly 300 thousands of jobs (a pro-gression of + 1.9%) were created between the first quarters of 2006 and 2007 in the “mainly commer-cial” sectors (graph 01). This increase is the result of opposing tendencies. Salaried employment in the construction business and in support services for companies and individuals enjoyed a 4% increase. On the other hand, employee numbers in industrial sectors declined (-1.4% on average), with the pro-portionately greatest losses in the automobile and consumer goods sectors.

And so at the beginning of 2007, young people hol-ding upper secondary qualifications entered a more vigorous labour market enabling them to recover or improve on employment rates for the beginning of 2005 (graph 02). Access to employment of indivi-duals holding specialised qualifications in industrial sectors which had greatly declined improved more than that of those specialised in trade and support services.

Initial difficulty in entering the labour market then tended to diminish. Thus among previous cohorts who had finished their initial education around five years earlier, 77% of CAP- and BEP-holders and 84% of those holding a technological or vocational bac-calauréat were employed in 2006 (graph 03). By this same end-of-education milestone, holders of voca-tional baccalauréats benefited from the best condi-tions in secondary education in the light of the total

percentage of jobs held. Still by this same milestone, one out of four baccalauréat-holders held a job in an intermediary profession or was self-employed and more than one out of three held skilled jobs as em-ployees or manual workers. CAP- and BEP-holders had more skilled jobs than the less qualified, were less often unemployed and above all, nearly all had work experience. Former apprentices held more po-sitions as skilled workers than former lycée pupils with the same qualifications.

Approximately 5 years after completing their initial education, �1% of young people whose highest qualification is a baccalauréat are employed compared to 77% of CAP- and BEP-holders and only 49% of those with no diploma.

Source: MEN-DEPP, INSEE Employment surveys and estimates, DARES, UNEDICCoverage: Metropolitan France

Graph 01 is based on numbers of employees in the sectors known as “mainly commercial” communicated by UNEDIC; it concerns situations at the end of March (as do the rates mentioned in the remarks). These employees number 16.0 million for a total of 25.6 million jobs, 7.0 million employees working in the so-called non-commercial sectors, 0.3 in agriculture and the self-employed numbering 2.2 million. For more details: Premières synthèses INSEE/DARES n° 26 (First analyses INSEE/DARES No. 26).1st June 2008. Graph 02 is taken from the survey on lycée graduates’ transition to working life (TWL) which is carried out in February, roughly 7 months after the end of their education.The indicator concerns the proportion of young people holding employment (subsidised or not).Graph 03 and table 04 are based on INSEE Employment surveys (throughout 2006) and concern young people who finished their initial education 3 to 7 years earlier i.e. between 1999 and 2003. Graph 03 concerns the cohorts in general and table 04, only those in employment.In graph 03, the “intermediary” professions refer to people in charge who do not have managerial or executive status. Non-skilled employees are those working in trading jobs, support services for individuals, civil service support staff and ambulance staff in addition to security staff.

2�employment and professional careers of secondary school graduates

04 Proportions of higher- and intermediary-level professions among jobs (200�)

in %

QualificationApprox 5 years after

completing educationTotal population in employment

Higher education graduates 73 78

General baccalauréat 38 50

Technological baccalauréat 22 39

Vocational baccalauréat 21 27

CAP/BEP school 10 23

CAP/BEP apprentices 4 16

Total baccalauréat- and CAP/BEP-holders 1� 2�

Brevet 13 27

No diploma 9 10

Total (incl. higher education qualifications) 45 39Source: DEPP calculations based on INSEE 200� Employment surveys (annual average)

Source: ???

01 Evolution in commercial jobs per key industry sector since 1970 (on 30th March)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1970 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 2008

Millions

ConstructionIndustry excluding construction

Mainly commercial tertiary

Interpretation: in February 2007, 74% of young people holding a vocational baccalauréatgeared to production who had completed their education in 2006, were in employment, either “subsidised” or not (out of the option sub-sets questioned).N.B.: these data concern part of the area covered by TWL surveys: qualified graduates only, study options questioned in 2005 and completing the final year of preparation for the diploma (but excluding for instance BEP-holders coming from the first year of vocational baccalauréat courses).Source: TWL surveys of February 2005 and 2007, MEN-DEPP

Vocational bacProduction

Techno. bacProduction

Vocational bac Services

Techno. bacServices

CAP/BEPServices

CAP/BEPProduction

2005 2007

02 Employment rates at beginning February of lycée graduates according to their highest qualification

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80%

0

20

40

60

80

100%

Managers and executives, intermediary professionsFarmers, skilled craftsmen, merchandisersEmployees, skilled workersEmployees, unskilled workers

Unemployed who have already workedUnemployed who have never workedNo activity

Interpretation: throughout 2006, approximately 5 years after completing their initial education, 78% of young people holding a brevet, CAP, BEP or baccalauréat wereemployed compared to 49% of young people with no diploma or only a certificate of general education.Source: DEPP calculations based on INSEE 2006 Employment surveys (annual average)

Genera

l

bacca

lauréa

t

Techn

ologic

al

bacca

lauréa

t

Vocat

ional

bacca

lauréa

tCAP/B

EP

appre

ntices

hipCAP/B

EP

schoo

lBrev

et

No dipl

oma

All seco

ndary

educa

tion d

iplom

as

03 Professional status of young people having completed initial education 5 years previously, according to their highest qualification (2006)

29

The national community dedicated 23.7 billion euros to higher education in 2007, representing

an increase of 3.5% compared to 2006 (in constant prices). Since 1980, expenditure on higher education has increased sharply, nearly 3.3% per year on avera-ge. Its weight in domestic expenditure on education rose from 14.6% in 1980 to 18.9% in 2007 (table 01).

This increase in rate of growth, particularly percepti-ble since 2006, is due to taking into account an larger portion of all university research activities on the one hand and on the other, the cost review of health and social training programmes which now come under the responsibility of the Regions.

Over the whole of this period, the DEE dedicated to higher education was multiplied by 2.4 but in the face of more or less doubled numbers, the average expenditure per student has only increased by 36% (taking into consideration breaks in series in 1999 and 2006) to reach 10,150 euros in 2007. At the same time, the average expenditure per pupil in secondary education increased by 63%.

International comparisons (based on national data which are not always homogeneous) show that the mean annual expenditure per student in France (11,000 dollar-equivalents in 2005, including research and development activities) is lower than the average in OECD countries (11,510 dollar-equivalents). As for the cumulative average cost per student estimated by OECD over the entire length of time dedicated to higher education, France is also below average (but a certain number of countries, such as the United States, do not participate in this indicator).

The average costs per student vary greatly depen-ding on the different education options (graph 02). They vary from 8,970 euros per year for a student in a public-sector university to as much as 13,880 euros for a student in CPGE (Classe Préparatoire aux Gran-des Écoles – preparatory classes for the competitive entrance exam to French Grandes Écoles). In IUTs (university institute of technology), alongside pro-grammes preparing for DUTs (technical university di-plomas), the growth in numbers enrolling to prepare vocational licence partly explains the drop in the average cost per student (9,020 euros in 2007).

The theoretical cost of the 18 years of education with no repeats leading to a licence was estimated at 131,190 euros in 2007. 17 years of education leading to a DUT would cost the community 122,610 euros and a BTS, 131,290 euros.

The share of the State in funding the DEE is pre-ponderant concerning higher education (72.9% in 2007); the share of regional authorities is rising and now reaches 10.7%, that of households standing at 9.0%. Some direct or indirect subsidies funded by the French State for the benefit of students or their fami-lies are not taken into account in the DEE for higher education: they concern tax benefits (increase in the family income splitting) or expenditure not directly linked to student status (housing subsidies). Taking them into account (except for contributions to social benefit schemes) would increase the nation’s ave-rage cost per student in 2007 from 10,150 to 11,270 euros.

The national community spent 23.7 billion euros on higher education in 2007. This expenditure has been multiplied by 2.4 since 19�0 (in constant prices).In 2007, the average expenditure per pupil reached 10,150 euros i.e. 3�% more than in 19�0.

Source: MEN-MESR-DEPPFor international comparisons: OECDCoverage: Metropolitan France + DOM, all

Amounts for the most recent year’s expenditure are draft figures.Education expenditure on higher education includes total expenditure on public and private-sector institutions in Metropolitan France and the DOM linked to education and associated activities: university aid organisations, administration, supplies, university libraries, remuneration of education staff in training, etc. It includes neither continuous training programmes nor, before 2006, university research operating and investment costs (but it did include the salaries of combined research-teaching staff).As from 2006, due to the new presentation of budget acts within the LOLF framework, all university research costs are included (staff, operating and investment costs) in addition to all costs entailed by the libraries.The international indicator is shown in dollar-equivalents converted using the purchasing power parities, which are currency exchange rates used as a common reference for expressing the purchasing power of different currencies.

�� I �9 The State of Education No. 18 [2008 edition]

2901 Education expenditure on higher education


19�0 1990 2000 200� 2007DEE for higher education*in current prices (billions of ¤) 4,2 11,2 17,5 22,4 23,7 in 2007 prices (billions of ¤) 9,9 14,8 20,2 22,9 23,7 Proportion of DEE (%) 14,6 16,4 16,7 18,3 18,9 Average expenditure per student*

in 2007 prices (¤) 7 080 7 960 9 260 9 850 10 150 Structure of initial funding (in %) **State 73,9 72,9

of which MEN and MESR 65,8 64,9Regional authorities 9,5 10,7Other public administrations *** 1,5 1,5Companies 6,0 5,9Households 9,1 9,0

The DEE was reassessed (see methodology indicator 01) for the whole of the 1980-2007 period.Average expenditures per pupil were reassessed only after 1999.** The structure of initial funding for higher education was reassessed as from 2003.***Including consular chambers (CCI, CM, CA, etc.)Source: MEN-MESR-DEPP


02 Evolution in average expenditure per student in 2007 prices (1980-2007)


5 000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

11,000

12,000

13,000

14,000

15,000

€16,000

1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007

7,080

Total

CPGE

STS 13,360

10,150

University

9,020

IUT

8,970

13,880

in 2005 dollar-equivalents

Average yearly expenditure per student,including research and development activities

in 2005 dollar-equivalents

*Italy: public sector onlyNB: data on the average duration of study in the United States are not available

Cumulative costs per student for average duration of study (including research)



5,0000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000

24,370

15,950

14,580

13,880

13,510

12,450

12,290

11,900

11,510

11,000

10,470

10,090

United StatesSweden

AustraliaNetherlands

United KingdomGermany

FinlandBelgium

Average for OECD countriesFranceIrelandSpain

74,630

66,760

59,580

58,650

50,170

47,160

47,020

44,200

40,210

35,760

33,920

SwedenGermany

FinlandUnited Kingdom

JapanAverage for OECD countries

SpainFranceItaly*

BelgiumIreland

expenditure on higher education

30

Expenditure dedicated to continuing education amounted to 10.3 billion euros in 2007 (according

to the Compte de l’éducation or Education Accounts, where the approach is different from the Compte de la formation professionnelle, or Vocational training Accounts, see methodology). From 1980 to 2007, this expenditure went from 7.1 to 10.3 billions in constant euros i.e. a 50% increase but its share in the DEE de-clined from 10.4 to 8.2% (table 01).

Over the same period, expenditure on extracurricular education nearly tripled, notably following a transfer of arts education expenditure in 1999 (municipal arts academies) which up to this time had come under the secondary education budget.

In initial funding, i.e. before transfers, these expen-ditures had mainly been borne by companies (45.5%) and the State (26.6%). In particular, the State funds the training of its staff in addition to those seeking employment: the Ministry of Labour, Social Rela-tions and Solidarity is thus the main public source of funds. The Ministry of Education produces a sizeable part of continuing education and participates to the level of 13% in State funding.

While continuing education was initially designed as a “second chance school” for the benefit of the less qualified, it would appear that in companies it is more accessible to the better educated and most qualified categories of employee (table 02). In the same vein, most of the unemployed do not take advantage of it so that here too, inequalities in initial education are repeated. The lower the unemployed person’s qua-

lification, the less likely he/she is to resort to trai-ning to find another job: among those whose level of education is lower than Year 10, only a little over 5% benefited from training in 2004 compared to 30% of those holding a qualification obtained through 5 or more years’ successful post-baccalauréat study.

The validation of acquired skills is another way of ob-taining a qualification by official recognition of work experience. The number of VAE candidates contac-ting the national education authorities to obtain a na-tional vocational or technological qualification has risen sharply since 2002: in 2007, the number of files submitted to a jury decreased slightly but the number of candidates receiving a full diploma stood at 13,800 (graph 03). More often than not, they aim for a qualifi-cation equivalent to or higher than the baccalauréat (graph 04): 16% of applications in 2007 concerned the “other EN (Min. of Education) diplomas” category, notably with a view to obtaining a level III State di-ploma for specialised teaching.

Since 2002, this system has also developed in higher education (universities and CNAM, a public scienti-fic, cultural and professional institution). In 2007, rou-ghly 4,200 qualifications were partially or totally vali-dated, with 2,150 complete diplomas being awarded.

10.3 billion euros were dedicated to continuing education programmes i.e. �.2% of education expenditure and 2.3 billions to extracurricular training. While continuing education always benefits the most qualified employees, qualifications from CAP to Masters can be totally or partially obtained through the validation of acquired skills.

Coverage: Metropolitan France & Metropolitan France + DOMSources : MEN-MESR-DEPP, MTRSS (DARES), Cereq

Expenditure for continuing education programmes includes the expenditures incurred by all the economic staff (State, regional authority administrations and others, companies, households) in organising continuing education courses, including on-the-job training organised internally by companies and administrations. The main differences between the Education Accounts used here and the Vocational Training Accounts set up by the Ministry of Labour, Social Relations and Solidarity amounting to 25.6 billion euros, are as follows: the latter includes apprenticeship, remuneration of trainees and exemption from social charges linked to sandwich training and apprenticeship contracts.Extracurricular programmes include evening classes, CNAM programmes, etc. They are included in education expenditure where the overall total (125.3 billions) is distributed between primary education (35.9 billions), secondary education (53.0 billions), higher education (23.7 billions) and this indicator (10.3 and 2.3).


30continuing education01 Expenditure on continuing vocational training and extracurricular education


19�0 1990 2000 200� 2007

DEE for continuing education

in current prices (billions of ¤) 3.0 7.0 10.2 9.9 10.3

in 2007 prices (billions of ¤) 7.0 9.4 11.8 10.2 10.3

DEE for extracurricular education (1)

in current prices (billions of ¤) 0.3 0.8 1.8 2.2 2.3

in 2007 prices (billions of ¤) 0.8 1.1 2.1 2.3 2.3

Proportion of DEE (%) 11.6 11.5 11.4 9.9 10.0

Structure of initial funding (in %) (*)

State 26.9 2�.�

of which MEN 4.1 3.5

Regional authorities 13.5 14.�

Other public administrations and CAF 1.9 1.9

Companies 46.3 45.5

Households 11.4 11.2

(1) “extracurricular” education means CNAM programmes, artistic training (budgets transferred from secondary education since 2003)Initial funding: see methodology indicator 01.Source: MEN-MESR-DEPP

02 Employee access rate to continuing education in 2004 according to company size in %, excluding sandwich, CIF and professional training contracts

Metropolitan France

Working class

Employees Technicians Engineers Total

10-19 employees 7.9 11.5 24.1 20.1 12.5

20-49 employees 14.5 12.0 30.8 29.8 19.7

50-249 employees 26.1 29.4 46.6 47.3 33.9

250-499 employees 31.8 35.7 54.5 57.6 42.1

500-1,999 employees 35.7 43.3 60.4 63.0 49.2

2,000 employees and + 41.7 39.8 65.7 64.1 50.4

Total 29.0 29.3 55.0 53.2 39.0Source: Tax forms No. 24� 3 – Céreq processing


0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

whose application has been examined by a juryhaving obtained a full diploma


03 Validation of acquired skills (VAE)

Candidates for a vocational and technological qualification from the Ministry of Education

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

0

10

20

30

40

50

60%

CAP BEP BP Vocational baccalauréat

BTS OtherEN diplomas


04 Distribution of VAE candidates according to the desired vocational or technological qualification

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Appendix


An overall decline in pupil and student numbers for the past two academic years

In 2007-2008, the total number of pupils, apprentices and students enrolled in public- and private-sector education in Metropolitan France and overseas departments (DOM) amounted to a little more than 14.9 million, with 550,000 in DOMs. After the growth recorded over the 2001-2005 period, it has once more declined by a little over 100,000 over the past two academic years.

The changes vary between levels of education. Due to the current demographic recovery and the increased number of births since 2000, the drop in primary education numbers came to an end with the 2003 school year. Since then, an increase of more than 100,000 school-children has been observed, a number which fell in 2006 however, before sinking to next to nothing at the start of the 2007 school year: the increase observed in primary education is com-pensated by an equivalent drop in nursery school. In secondary education however, the number of pupils enrolled in schools under the responsibility of the Ministry of Education continued to fall at a slightly slower rate in 2007 (-47,000 i.e. -0.9%) than the previous school year (-67,000 i.e. -1.2%). As in 2006, this drop affected all levels of education. Primary has registered a regular decline in numbers since the middle of the ‘90s due to the enrolment of more spar-sely-numbered generations: however, this decline has gradually slowed down over the past few years. After a slight recovery between 2001 and 2005, numbers have dropped in vocational secondary education for the past two school years. In 2007, there was a drop in general and technological secondary education for the third consecutive year.

Apprenticeship however, now part of vocational qualification at all levels, continues to develop in terms of quantity. The growth in apprentice numbers, which was strong all through the ‘90s but ceased at the beginning of the 2000s, shows a clear recovery since 2004 especially in higher education programmes where 20% of the total number of apprentices are now enrolled (more than 400,000 for the 2006 academic year). Finally, numbers in secondary agricul-tural and “healthcare” education have been relatively stable for the past few years, standing at roughly 150,000 and 80,000 respectively.

Since 1980, the student population has practically doubled (inclusive of all programmes). The growth trend has given way over the past decade to less extensive and contrasting changes: stagnation or even decline in numbers at the end of the ‘90s, followed by a growth of 120,000 between 2000 and 2005. At the start of the past two academic years, higher education lost 55,000 students, mainly in the general university disciplines.

Pupil and student numbers. Total of primary and secondary education pupils (including special needs education), apprentices, university and non- university students, in the public and private sectors in Metropolitan France and DOMs (including pupils, ap-prentices and students under the responsibility of the Ministry of Agriculture). It should be observed that censuses relative to higher education total up enrolments, not students.

Evolution in pupil and student numbersMetropolitan France + DOM, public and private sectors

Numbers in thousands 19�0-19�1 1990-1991 2000-2001 2005-200� 200�-2007 2007-200�

Primary (1)

Pre-primary 2,456.5 2,644.2 2,540.3 2,612.0 2,578.4 2,551.1

Yr 2-Yr 6 4,810.0 4,218.0 3,953.0 3,962.0 4,016.9 4,047.3

ASH 129.8 91.2 58.7 50.5 48.7 46.8

Total primary 7,39�.3 �,953.4 �,552.0 �,�24.� �,�44.1 �,�45.1

Secondary (2)

Lower secondary 3,261.9 3,253.5 3,290.9 3,139.0 3,100.6 3,084.0

Upper secondary vocational (3) 807.9 750.0 705.4 724.0 719.7 713.4

Upper secondary general and technological 1,124.4 1,607.6 1,501.5 1,512.9 1,491.2 1,470.0

Special needs (SEGPA) 114.9 114.6 116.6 109.5 106.6 104.0

Total Min. Ed. secondary education 5,309.2 5,725.� 5,�14.4 5,4�5.4 5,41�.0 5,371.4

Secondary Agriculture (4) 117.1 116.2 151.3 154.9 155.0 153.5

Apprenticeship centres (5) 244.1 226.9 376.1 395.6 424.4 440.8

Health issue children “enrolled” (6) 96.2 88.2 81.4 76.3 77.0 77.0

Higher education

Total higher education 1,1�4.1 1,717.1 2,1�0.3 2,2�3.3 2,254.4 2,22�.2

Overall total 14,34�.9 14,�27.5 14,935.4 15,020.1 14,972.� 14,915.9

(1) As from 2000: estimates for all primary education.(2) EREA numbers are distributed according to the syllabus followed by the pupils.(3) Including various preparatory classes and additional education at levels V and IV.(4) Excluding redundancies with the Ministry of Education.(5) Junior apprentices and CPA in collèges are included in lower secondary education numbers.(6) 2006-2007 data in 2007-2008.

Appendix


Schools

In comparison with changes in school num-bers, evolution in the number of schools de-monstrates a tendency to decline in primary education (55,300 schools in 2007 compared to nearly 69,000 in 1980) and a relative stabi-lity in secondary education (a little more than 11,000 collèges, LP and lycées, both public and private).

The recent renewal and reorganisation of the priority education policy has led to classifying a little over 8,000 schools in either the réseaux ambition réussite (ambition success networks) or the réseaux de réussite scolaire (educa-tional success networks) categories. The for-mer include approximately 250 collèges and 1,740 schools.

Evolution in number of schoolsMetropolitan France + DOM, public and private

Schools 19�0-19�1 1990-1991 2001-2002 2004-2005 2007-200�PublicNursery schools 15,996 18,829 18,448 17,703 17,000Primary schools 45,664 39,009 34,279 33,452 32,928Total �1,��0 57,�3� 52,727 51,155 49,92�PrivateNursery schools 363 419 245 184 213Primary schools 6,663 5,966 5,395 5,289 5,188Total 7,02� �,3�5 5,�40 5,473 5,401Total public + private ��,�� 4,223 5�,3�7 5�,�2� 55,329

Secondary education institutions 19�0-19�1 1990-1991 2001-2002 2004-2005 2007-200�PublicCollèges (CES, CEG) 4,891 5,019 5,139 5,200 5,247LP (LEP, CET) 1,353 1,362 1,096 1,061 1,027Lycées (LEGT) 1,134 1,294 1,527 1,545 1,563EREA (ENP) nd 82 80 80 80Total 7,37� 7,757 7,�42 7,�� 7,917PrivateCollèges (ESC, CC) 1,757 1,814 1,802 1,788 1,778LP (LEP, ETC) 978 809 650 641 660Lycées (EST, ET, ES) 1,194 1,290 1,094 1,069 1,063Total 3,929 3,913 3,54� 3,49� 3,501Total public + private 11,307 11,�70 11,3�� 11,3�4 11,41�

Number of priority education zone schools for 2007 school yearMetropolitan France + DOM, public

“Ambition réussite” network (RAR)

“Réussite scolaire” network (RRS)

Total of which ZEP

Schools 1,73� 5,329 3,929

Nursery schools 813

Primary schools 925

Collèges 253 �57 638

Diplomas awarded

All in all, the Ministry of Education delivered nearly 1.5 million diplomas to collège and lycée pupils in 2007: a little over 600,000 national brevet diplomas (ISCED 2-level certificate) to pupils in Year 10, slightly more than 500,000 baccalauréats in the three general, technological and vocational streams and a little over 300,000 level V vocational diplomas (CAP and BEP).

Much lower since 1990 than in the ‘70s and ‘80s, evolution in the number of diplomas, variable depending on the le-vel, is first and foremost due to the general upward trend of education levels: while the number of successful CAP candidates has practically halved (a decline emphasised by the gradual elimination of associated CAPs and can-didates coming from final year BEP), the vocational bac-calauréat has continued to develop since it was created 20 ears ago and now numbers more than 100,000 suc-cessful candidates (compared to 25,000 in 1990).

The number of successful candidates in the various exams is also changing due to the declining demogra-phic trends, thus inclining to limit rises and accentuate drops (this is currently the case for the brevet or the BEP, for instance).

On the other hand, progression in the number of succes-sful candidates is supported, or even accentuated, by the general tendency towards an increase in exam suc-cess rates: since 1990 the vocational baccalauréat has enjoyed a 4-point rise, the BEP, a rise of 5 points, 9 for the brevet, a little over 10 for general and technological baccalauréats and finally, nearly 15 points for the CAP.

Evolution in diplomas awardedMetropolitan France + DOM

1990 1995 2000 2005 200� 2007

Brevetpresent 803,156 805,317 771,589 784,739 788,148 749,623

successful 584,453 592,153 601,110 620,762 620,168 613,314

% success 72.8 73.5 77.9 79.1 78.7 81.8

CAPpresent 415,825 363,355 287,945 189,439 170,869 173,308

successful 269,798 260,673 215,623 145,913 132,192 137,977

% success 64.9 71.7 74.9 77.0 77.4 79.6

BEPpresent 230,625 284,770 285,799 248,338 247,095 242,040

successful 161,811 188,224 208,559 186,575 182,131 181,638

% success 70.2 66.1 73.0 75.1 73.7 75.0

General baccalauréatpresent 332,638 382,310 339,380 324,167 326,674 321,233

successful 250,864 287,046 271,155 272,512 282,788 281,733

% success 75.4 75.1 79.9 84.1 86.6 87.7

Technological baccalauréatpresent 169,406 183,154 193,107 184,788 181,950 173,545

successful 115,808 138,267 152,778 140,828 140,707 137,685

% success 68.4 75.5 79.1 76.2 77.3 79.3

Vocational baccalauréatpresent 33,095 90,716 117,019 124,929 130,037 133,748

successful 24,602 65,936 92,617 93,268 100,562 104,975

% success 74.3 72.7 79.1 74.7 77.3 78.5

Equivalence of school years

French systemEnglish system (used in this document) American system Explanation

CM1 Year 5 Fourth Grade Penultimate year of primary school

CM2 Year 6 Fifth Grade Last year of primary school

Sixième Year 7 Sixth Grade First year of lower secondary school

Première Year 12 Eleventh Grade Penultimate year of upper secondary school

Terminale Year 13 Twelfth Grade Final year of upper secondary school

Levels of educationNational list of levels determined by the Commission statistique nationale de la formation professionnelle et de la promotion sociale (national statistics committee for vocational education and social promotion)Level VI : left after lower secondary education (Years 7-9) and one-year pre-vocational programmes (CEP, CPPN, and CPA).

Level V bis : left after general Year 10, technological Year 9 & 10 and short upper-secondary cycle classes before the final year.

Level V : left after short-cycle, professional-course final year or dropped out of long-cycle secondary education before Year 13.

Level IV : left after long-cycle secondary education Year 13 and dropped out of post-baccalauréat courses before reaching level III.

Level III : left with a bac + 2 yrs. qualification (DUT, BTS, DEUG, colleges for training in health and social careers, etc.).Levels II et I : left with a second- or third-cycle university diploma, or a diploma from a Grande École.

International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED)ISCED 1 : primary educationISCED 2 : lower secondary educationISCED 3 : upper secondary educationISCED 4 : post-secondary education not included in higher education (practically inexistent in France)ISCED 5 : first- and second-cycle higher educationISCED � : third-cycle higher education (research doctorates)

Devised by UNESCO at the beginning of the ‘70s, this classification system was revised and approved in 1997 following broad international consultation. It is a tool for all nations to produce comparable education and training statistics and distribute the school-goers, flows of graduates, human and financial resources based on a common scale of education le-vels. It also serves to classify the population by education level. Successful studies recognised by a diploma is the level of education taken into account: thus in France, individuals with an ISCED 3 level hold at least a CAP, BEP or baccalauréat.


Acronym tableASH (ex AIS) : Special needs and education for disabled pupils.ATOSS : Administrative, technical, manual worker, service, health and social (staff).BEP : Certificate of vocational education.BEPA : Certificate of vocational education in agriculture.BIT : Bureau international du travail.BTS : Higher vocational diploma.CAP : Certificate of vocational aptitude.CAPA : Certificate of vocational aptitude in agriculture.CAPES : Secondary school teaching diploma.CEREQ : Centre for study and research in training and educa-tion policy.COP : Guidance counsellor/psychologist.CPA : Apprenticeship preparatory class.DEE: Domestic Education Expenditure.DEPP : Ministry of Education Directorate for evaluation, forecast and performance.DGES : Directorate-General for higher educationDGESCO : Directorate-General for educationDGRH : Directorate-General for Human ResourcesDOM : French overseas department.DSN : National Service Directorate.ES : Economy and social sciences.IEA : International association for the evaluation of educational achievement.INSEE : National Institute for Statistics and Economic Studies.ITRF : Engineers and technical staff for research and training.IUP : Vocational university institute.IUT : Technological university institut.JAPD : National defence information day.L : Literary.

LOLF : Constitutional bylaw on budget acts.MI-SE : Housemaster and monitor.MEN : Ministry of Education.MESR : Ministry for Higher Education and Research.OCDE : Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.PEGC : Lower secondary school teachers.PIRLS : Progress in International Literacy Study.PISA : Programme for International Student Assessment.RAR : “Ambition success” network.RASED : Network of special educational assistance for children in difficulty.RRS : Network for educational success.S : Scientific.SEGPA : Special needs general and vocational education section.STG (ex STT) : Management sciences and technologySTI : Industrial sciences and technologySTS : Higher technician section.TOM : French overseas territory.VAE : Validation of acquired skills.ZEP : Priority education zone.

Publicationsedited by Depp

In addition to complete statistical data resulting from systematic surveys, Ministry of Education and Ministry of Higher Education and Research publications edited by DEPP offer different series of analytical indicators, articles on methodology and summary notes, study or research results. They will help the reader acquire a deeper understanding of our country’s education system beyond the contents of the present document.

> l’état de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la RechercheA short study of costs, activities and results in Higher Education and Research in 30 indicators covering the whole system, from the baccalauréat to doctoral studies, including research activity and continuing education. International elements of comparison give France’s position in relation to OECD countries.

1� euros,edition No 2, December 200�.

> Repères et références statistiquessur les enseignements,la formation et la rechercheDetailed statistical information on all components of Education in France with clear, concise texts, definitions, documentary references and an index.

2� euros,September 200�.

> Atlas régionaleffectifs d’étudiants en 2007-2008This publication is a reference document for all territorial, national and regional approaches to the higher education system.It is a tool giving the different partners and actors in the higher education system a common, comprehensive vision of how things stand and recent developments.

15 euros, 200� edition [pending].

> éducation & formationsStudy and information review with articles on the key challenges facing Education. A DEPP publication for all actors in the education system.

Sold by issue only2001 and 2002: 12.20 euros.From 2003: 13 euros.

> Les dossiersEach issue is dedicated to the results of a study or assessment on a given topic and offers a complete and detailed report of an aspect of the French education system.It includes comprehensive explanations of the methodological elements required to understand the results.

From issue No. 141: 15 euros.

> The Depp Note d’information is ongoing throughout the year to ensure speedy distribution of statistical information. Each memo takes stock of an aspect of the education system and provides the fundamental information coming from the latest processing of surveys and studies, presented clearly and concisely.

You are seeking statistical information Requests by telephone or letter

Centre de documentation�1-�5, rue Dutot75732 Paris Cedex 15Telephone01 55 55 73 5�[email protected]

You would like to consult Direction de l’évaluation, de la prospective et de la performance publications via Internet.www.education.gouv.fr

www.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr

You would like to purchase publications from the Direction de l’évaluation, de la prospective et de la performance.

Catalogues, purchases, subscriptions

DEPPDépartement de la valorisation et de l’édition�1-�5, rue Dutot75732 Paris Cedex 15Sales: 01 55 55 72 04Fax: 01 55 55 72 29

This work is published byLe ministère de l’Education nationale et le ministère de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la RechercheDirection de l’évaluation,de la prospectiveet de la performance61-65, rue Dutot75732 Paris Cedex 15

Executive EditorDaniel Vitry

EditorPaul Esquieu

Assistant Editor’s Office DEPP/Département de la valorisation et de l’édition (Development and Publications Department)Marie Zilberman

AuthorsDominique AbriacGinette BournyGérard BrézillonAgnès BrunChantal BrutelMarc ColmantSéverine Dos SantosSébastien DurierJérôme FabreMichèle JacquotMartine JeljoulFlorence Léger

Bruno LutinierClaude Malègueélodie LeprévostDelphine PerelmuterPascale PolletPascale Poulet-CoulibandoDanièle ProuteauThierry RocherAlexia Stéfanou

DEPP/DVE LayoutSolange GuégeaisPrinted by DEPP/DVEDEPP/DVE SalesEvelyne Deslandes61-65, rue Dutot75735 Paris CedexTranslationProvence Traduction

collection

topic

title of document

issued by

date publisehd

frequency

for further details

ActivitiesCosts

tsluseR International Comparisons

5 0835000 PPED8805-2511 NSSI

Legal deposit4th quarter 2008

978-2-11-095435-0 NBSI No 18 – October 2008

30 French education system indicators


The French education system

The state of Education : 30 French education system indicators

DEPP/Development and publications Department

October 2008

Annual

www.education.gouv.fr

The

stat

e of

Educ

atio

n No

18 [O

ctob

er 2

008]


Primary education

Overall

Secondary education

ISBN 978-2-11-095435-0

9 7 8 2 1 1 0 9 5 4 3 5 0


Continuing education

Documents

The state of Education