The Education Policy Outlook uses an analytical framework to examine education policy ecosystems. Drawing on OECD work with countries on education policy, this framework serves as a lens through which readers can review education systems from the point of view of students, institutions and systems (see Annex A, Table A A1.1). The OECD Education Policy Outlook has been using this analytical framework since 2012 to carry out comparative and country-based analysis of education policies from early childhood education and care to higher education and lifelong learning.
Education Policy Outlook 2018
Putting Student Learning at the Centre
Report
Education Policy Outlook
Table of contents
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reader’s Guide
The Education Policy Outlook analytical framework
Coverage by primary source of information
This report features data on education from 43 education systems within and beyond the OECD that participated in a comprehensive survey on education policy and in OECD’s ongoing series of Education Policy Outlook Country Profiles (see Annex A, Table A A.2):
The Education Policy Outlook National Survey for Comparative Policy Analysis 2016-17 (referred to in this report as EPO Survey 2016-17) compares and updates information on countries’ education policies and policy priorities collected by the Education Policy Outlook from 2008 to 2013. A total of 26 education systems responded to the survey between 2016 and 2017. In addition to the 2013 survey questions, the 2016-17 survey gathered information on the evidence underpinning the policies and on their life cycle (implementation, evaluation, evolution and completion). The 2016-17 survey also collected evidence on evaluation and implementation processes for key policies implemented since 2000.
Education Policy Outlook Country Profiles: This report draws on information from the Country Profiles published in 2017 (Austria, Belgium, Italy, Latvia and Sweden, which represent a total of seven education systems), as well as the country profile for Greece (2018, forthcoming).
For this report, the OECD also analysed about 150 OECD publications of country-based analysis produced from 2008 until mid-2017. The publications considered for this analysis consist mainly of country and thematic reviews and economic surveys. Although these publications have different scopes and are, in some cases, subject to voluntary participation, they are a valuable source to highlight trends in policy priorities previously identified by the OECD in its work with countries (see Annex A, Table A A.3 for the list of these publications).
Policies collected in the 2013 Education Policy Outlook Survey for which the OECD Secretariat was unable to gather updated information are not included in the policy analysis of this report (see Annex B for the list of these policies).
The OECD also analysed national and international evidence for all participant education systems. Such further education data is also included for five OECD education systems (Denmark, Israel, Luxembourg, Poland and the United States), two OECD accession countries (Colombia and Costa Rica) and one OECD partner county (Kazakhstan).
Layout of tables
Chapters 2 and 4 (policy priorities):
The tables in Chapters 2 and 4 include information on education systems from previous OECD country-based work, as well as the challenges reported by countries in the Education Policy Outlook National Surveys for Comparative Policy Analysis carried out in 2013 and 2016-17, which cover 43 OECD and non-OECD education systems in the period from 2008 to 2017 (see above).
Belgium, Canada and the United Kingdom are organised into different regions or territories, each with their own government and autonomous education system. Policy priorities for these education systems are dealt with as follows:
Belgium: Policy priorities are considered individually for the Flemish Community, the French Community and the German-speaking Community.
Canada: Policy priorities are considered as a unit, as Canada’s policies are described from a federal perspective in both OECD country-based work and the EPO Surveys in 2013 and 2016-17.
United Kingdom: For OECD country-based work, policy priorities are considered individually for England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. For the Education Policy Outlook, only policies for England are considered in the EPO Surveys in 2013 and 2016-17.
Chapters 3 and 5 (policy trends):
The tables in these chapters include information on education policies for which there is available evidence of impact or progress and/or where the policy design is of potential interest to other education systems. Policies are classified according to their scope: comprehensive (overarching general strategies using various policy tools); content (specifically related to content knowledge); and targeted (focused on a specific recipient or approach).
Chapter 7 (country snapshots):
The tables in Chapter 7 include information on the evolution of key policy priorities identified in selected OECD country-based work (2008-17) and countries’ responses to the EPO Surveys in 2013 and 2016-17.
Coverage of statistics
This report is mainly based on OECD and Eurostat data. The main sources of OECD data include Education at a Glance (EAG), OECD Economic Surveys, the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), the Starting Strong work on early childhood education and care, and the Survey of Adult Skills of the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC). In some cases, where no OECD or Eurostat data was available, national data was consulted.
Terminology and classification of policy priorities and policy developments
Chapter 1
Policy ecosystems are the environments within an education system in which different policies interact with one another.
Policy priorities for each country generally reflect:
Key challenges: areas where the system is underperforming and which have been identified as a point of concern (such as a high level of student dropout or unemployment)
Key contextual issues: particular points of attention that a system needs to keep in mind, given its characteristics (such as demographic change or development of new regional or national industries)
Systemic objectives: short-term, mid-term and longer-term goals, as defined by government administrations.
Chapters 2 and 4
Policy priorities are classified as persisting if they continued to be identified by education systems throughout the period from 2008 to 2017.
Policy priorities are classified as emerging if they were identified by education systems only over the period from 2014 to 2017.
Chapters 3 and 5
Policies classified as still in place were first reported in the EPO Survey 2013 or were implemented between 2008 and 2014 and reported in the EPO Survey 2016-17 as having continued since the previous survey.
Policies classified as recent were implemented between 2015 and 2017, after the 2013 policy survey, which covered policies implemented between 2008 and 2014.
Policies in these chapters are grouped according to common objectives within each priority. A comparative approach is taken to present the life cycle of policies in place since 2008 and those that have been implemented since 2014.
Chapter 7
Selected policies appear in the comparative report in Chapters 3 and 5, as well as in the country snapshots in Chapter 7.
Additional selected policies are considered promising or of potential interest to other education systems due to their design. They do not appear in the comparative sections, but are included in the country snapshots in Chapter 7.
In the OECD Survey of Adult Skills (2012), adjusted mean proficiency in literacy among adults includes adults age 16-65 who were not able to provide enough background information because of language difficulties, or learning or mental disabilities (literacy-related non-response). They are attributed a very low score (85 points), which represents a lower bound for the mean score in each country.
Acknowledging the importance of national and subnational dynamics
The aim of this report is to provide an updated comparative perspective of policy continuity and policy change as part of education policy ecosystems, as well as the evidence available on their implementation outcomes. This overview of policy priorities and policies can serve as a source of inspiration for other education systems that share similar challenges and contextual characteristics. At the same time, this publication acknowledges that national and regional contexts, resources, traditions and institutional settings within OECD countries influence the impact of education policy priorities on their populations. These factors play a key role in the way actors may identify policy priorities for education systems over the short-, mid- or longer term. Differences also emerge in the policies and reforms put into place within education systems to address common key issues. See Chapter 1 for a detailed explanation of the importance of education policy ecosystems to help policies succeed.
A note on policy coverage and timing
This report aims to present a broad range of recent policy responses across different policy contexts. These policies do not represent the totality of ongoing policy activity in participating education systems for the topics analysed. Differences in the number of policies by education system included in this report are a function of the relative capacity to collect information on education policy in a given education system, rather than a measure of the volume of policy activity in the education system over the period.
In the same way, the timescales and processes required for implementation of a new reform can vary considerably between countries and also depend on the scope and intended coverage of the reform. This report focuses on policies which have been implemented since 2000 in the case of certain key evaluated policies or, more generally, since 2008.
It should be borne in mind as well that the term “implementation” can be interpreted differently by different systems. In some cases, an overall strategic plan may have different components which are implemented in stages; in others, it may be necessary to pass legislation before beginning to implement measures. The OECD Secretariat has endeavoured to include the most recent information possible. However, depending on exactly when a country completed the EPO Survey or when its country profile was published, the information presented may not reflect the most recent developments. At the same time, while this report originally only analysed policies implemented before the end of 2017, it was possible to include five policies implemented in 2018.
Further documentation
A follow-up report to be published in 2019, tentatively titled Education Policy Outlook 2019: Working Together to Help Students Achieve Their Potential will draw on the same data to examine the remaining areas of the Education Policy Outlook analytical framework: institutions (school improvement and evaluation and assessment) and systems (governance and funding).
For further information on the overall work of the Education Policy Outlook, please see its web page at www.oecd.org/education/policyoutlook.htm.