TALIS 2018 Results (Volume II)

What is TALIS?

Introduction

The OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) is an international, large-scale survey of teachers, school leaders and the learning environment in schools. TALIS uses questionnaires administered to teachers and their school principals to gather data. Its main goal is to generate internationally comparable information relevant to developing and implementing policies focused on school leaders, teachers and teaching, with an emphasis on those aspects that affect student learning. It gives a voice to teachers and school leaders, allowing them to provide input into educational policy analysis and development in key areas. It is also a collaboration between participating countries and economies, the OECD, an international research consortium, teachers’ unions and the European Commission.

TALIS must serve the goals of its three main beneficiaries: policy makers, education practitioners and researchers. First, it must help policy makers review and develop policies that promote the teaching profession and the best conditions for effective teaching and learning. Secondly, TALIS must also help teachers, school leaders, and education stakeholders to reflect upon and discuss their practice and find ways to enhance it. Thirdly, TALIS must build upon past research while informing the future work of researchers.

Which countries and economies participate in TALIS?

The first cycle of TALIS was conducted in 2008 in 24 countries. The second cycle, five years later – TALIS 2013 – included 34 participants. The following year, in 2014, four additional countries and economies participated, bringing the second cycle total to 38 participants. TALIS 2013 broadened its scope to include options for participants to also survey teachers and leaders in primary schools (ISCED level 1), in upper secondary schools (ISCED level 3), and in schools that had participated in the 2012 cycle of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), an option referred to as the TALIS-PISA link.

TALIS 2018 has expanded to include additional countries, bringing the total number of participants to 48 countries and economies.1 While maintaining the focus on lower secondary education (ISCED level 2, as classified by the International Standard Classification of Education [ISCED-2011] (UNESCO-UIS, 2012_[1]), which identifies comparable levels of education across countries), TALIS 2018 offered the same three options as TALIS 2013. In 2018, 15 countries and economies surveyed teachers and school leaders in their primary (ISCED level 1) schools, 11 did so in their upper secondary (ISCED level 3) schools and 9 countries conducted the survey in schools that participated in the 2018 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) through the TALIS-PISA link option. The main survey (ISCED level 2) has been conducted in 31 OECD countries and economies – Alberta (Canada),2 Australia,3 Austria, Belgium (the Flemish Community of Belgium4 and the French Community of Belgium also participated as a sub-national entity of Belgium), Chile, Colombia,5 the Czech Republic, Denmark,6^, 7 England (United Kingdom),8 Estonia, Finland, France,9 Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Japan,10 Korea,11 Latvia, Lithuania, Mexico, the Netherlands,12 New Zealand, Norway, Portugal,13 the Slovak Republic, Slovenia,14 Spain,15 Sweden,16^, 17 Turkey18^, 19 and the United States – as well as in Brazil,20 Bulgaria, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires (Argentina),21 Croatia,22 Cyprus,23 Georgia, Kazakhstan, Malta, Romania, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Shanghai (China), Singapore, South Africa, Chinese Taipei,24^, 25^, 26 the United Arab Emirates27^, 28 and Viet Nam.29^, 30

What is the TALIS survey about?

Nine main themes were selected for inclusion in the TALIS survey: teachers’ instructional practices, school leadership, teachers’ professional practices, teacher education and initial preparation, teacher feedback and development, school climate, job satisfaction, teacher human resource issues and stakeholder relations, teacher self-efficacy. Two cross-cutting themes were added to this list: innovation, and equity and diversity. More information on the conceptualisation of the eleven themes can be found in the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018 Conceptual Framework (Ainley and Carstens, 2018_[2]).

What are the key features of TALIS design?

The key features of TALIS 2018 survey design are as follows:

• International target population: lower secondary education teachers and school leaders of mainstream schools.

• Target sample size: 200 schools per country; 20 teachers and 1 school leader in each school.

• Target response rates for teachers: 75% of the sampled schools, together with a 75% response rate from all sampled teachers in the country. A school is considered to have responded if 50% of sampled teachers respond.

• Target response rates for school leaders: 75% of the sampled school leaders.

• Questionnaires: Separate questionnaires for teachers and school leaders, each requiring between 45 and 60 minutes to complete.

• Mode of data collection: questionnaires completed on paper or on line.

• Survey windows: September to December 2017 for Southern Hemisphere countries (with some countries extending into January 2018 as an exception) and March to May 2018 for Northern Hemisphere countries (with some early starting participants in January and February, and some extending into July 2018).

The sample size for the ISCED 1 and ISCED 3 options is the same as the sample size for ISCED 2: 200 schools per country and 20 teachers and 1 school leader per school. For the TALIS-PISA link, 150 schools were surveyed per country. The target response rates for all TALIS survey options were the same as those for the core ISCED 2 sample. Further details on the sample for all target populations can be found in Annex A.

What kinds of results does TALIS provide?

TALIS results are based exclusively on self-reports from teachers and school leaders and, therefore, represent their opinions, perceptions, beliefs and accounts of their activities. No data imputation from administrative data or other studies is conducted. Giving a voice to teachers provides insight into how they perceive the learning environments in which they work and how policies that are put in place are carried out in practice. But, as with any self-reported data, this information is subjective and may, therefore, differ from data collected through other means (e.g. administrative data or video observations). The same is true of school leaders’ reports about school characteristics and practices, which may differ from descriptions provided by administrative data at a national or local government level.

In addition, as a cross-sectional survey, TALIS cannot measure causality. For instance, in examining the relationship between teachers’ participation in professional development and self-efficacy in teaching, it is possible to determine the sense (positive, negative) of the association, its strength and its statistical significance, but it is not possible to establish whether participating in professional development depends on self-efficacy or whether self-efficacy depends on participation in professional development. The analyses presented in this report are conducted with an emphasis on the following aspects: 1) reporting of results about both teachers and school leaders throughout the report; 2) meaningful international comparisons; 3) trends; 4) contextualisation of results and 5) cross-theme analyses.

This report intends to provide results for both teachers and school leaders. The TALIS 2013 Results report (OECD, 2014_[3]) focused on results regarding teachers but also included one chapter and a few sections with results about school principals. The key findings highlighted in the 2013 report and in the School Leadership for Learning report (OECD, 2016_[4]) proposed including more results on school leaders in the TALIS 2018 Results report. To the extent that the themes are covered in the teacher and the principal questionnaires, results about school leaders and their schools are, therefore, spread throughout the report.

The analyses presented in this report aim at drawing meaningful international comparisons for benchmarking. Given that the number of participating countries and economies in TALIS has grown since the first two cycles, the average estimated from all participants in TALIS 2018 does not refer to the same populations of teachers and school leaders across time. Therefore, this report focuses on the average across the OECD countries and economies participating in TALIS 2018, as they belong to a more steady and coherent entity.

The report also aims at making the best use of the data accumulated over the three cycles since 2008. In 2018, for the first time, three data points (2018, 2013 and 2008) are available for some indicators across many countries and economies, making trend analyses possible to inform the monitoring of the teaching profession in lower secondary education. Yet, changes over time need to be interpreted with great caution (see Annex B).

Emphasis is also put on contextualising teachers’, principals’ and schools’ practices and attitudes by breaking down results according to pre-selected contextual variables. The TALIS 2013 Results report analysed how experienced teachers and trained teachers were distributed across more or less challenging schools (OECD, 2014, pp. 40-44_[3]). This report substantially expands this kind of analyses, especially to describe how teachers’, principals’ and schools’ practices vary by teachers’ characteristics – particularly teachers’ gender, age and experience – and by schools’ characteristics – geographical location, school type and composition.

The ambition of this report is to include cross-theme analyses in each chapter. Each chapter consistently depicts the state of a given aspect of teachers’ and principals’ work and analyses the way this aspect relates to key outcomes of teachers, or school leaders’ professionalism (see more detail in Chapter 1).

While this report focuses mainly on lower secondary teachers and school leaders, Chapters 2 to 5 also present some data and analyses for key indicators from primary and upper secondary teachers through text boxes. Two other types of text boxes are included throughout the report: text boxes highlighting examples of local or national education policies or practices and methodological boxes.

Box A. TALIS’ contributions to the Sustainable Development Goals

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were adopted by the United Nations in September 2015 (United Nations, 2015_[5]). Goal 4 of the SDGs seeks to ensure “inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”.

The OECD, through its large-scale international studies, is committed to helping countries monitor and report their work towards achieving and sustaining the SDGs (OECD, 2016_[4]). TALIS data, in particular, can contribute to providing information to Goal 4’s Target 4.c: “By 2030, substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers, including through international cooperation for teacher training in developing countries, especially least developed countries and small island developing States” (United Nations, 2015, p. 17_[5]). Target 4.c consists of one global indicator and six thematic indicators :1

• Global Indicator 4.c.1: Proportion of teachers in:

  pre-primary education

  primary education

  lower secondary education

  upper secondary education

  who have received at least the minimum organised teacher training (e.g. pedagogical training) pre-service or in-service required for teaching at the relevant level in a given country, by sex.

• Thematic indicators:

  • 4.c.2 Pupil-trained teacher ratio, by education level

  • 4.c.3 Percentage of teachers qualified according to national standards, by education level and type of institution

  • 4.c.4 Pupil-qualified teacher ratio by education level

  • 4.c.5 Average teacher salary relative to other professions requiring a comparable level of qualification

  • 4.c.6 Teacher attrition rate, by education level

  • 4.c.7 Percentage of teachers who received in-service training in the last 12 months, by type of training

TALIS data on professional development fit perfectly with indicator 4.c.7 for primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary teachers. For the other indicators, it is possible to consider some of the current TALIS indicators as “proxy measures” for the SDGs, particularly when no other internationally comparable indicator is currently available. For example, although TALIS does not have an indicator that aligns perfectly with 4.c.1, data on teacher certification and highest educational level attained can still be a proxy for qualified teachers and, thus, provide some information on the extent to which countries have achieved Goal 4.

The contribution of TALIS to the SDGs is not limited to the 4.c indicators. Other targets, means of implementation, and indicators of Goal 4 indirectly address the contribution of teachers to a quality education system. For example, the intent underlying indicator 4.7.1 is to monitor the “[e] xtent to which (i) global citizenship education and (ii) education for sustainable development, including gender equality and human rights, are mainstreamed at all levels in: (a) national education policies, (b) curricula, (c) teacher education and (d) student assessment” (UNESCO, 2016, p. 73_[6]). TALIS 2018 also collects information with regard to schools’ policies and teachers’ practices related to student diversity and various kinds of discrimination, which, in part, contribute to the goals of indicator 4.7.1.

Other OECD data, such as those derived from the OECD Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC) and the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), provide a solid evidence base for monitoring education systems. OECD analyses promote peer learning, as countries can compare their experiences in implementing policies. Together, OECD indicators, statistics and analyses can be seen as a model of how progress towards the SDG education goal can be measured and reported.

1. “Global indicators” are compulsory for UN member states. As such, every country should commit to achieving these indicators by 2030. “Thematic indicators” seek to provide a wide framework of indicators that can assist completion of the global indicator. These indicators are not compulsory for every country or region. From the total of 43 indicators for Goal 4, 11 are global indicators and 32 are thematic indicators.

Sources: United Nations (2015_[5]), Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; UNESCO (2016_[6]), Education 2030: Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action for the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4.

How is this report organised?

This volume is the second of two volumes forming the TALIS 2018 Results report. The chapters included in this volume present the first results and policy recommendations emerging from TALIS 2018.

• Chapter 1 gives readers who are closely involved with teaching and learning an overview of the main findings and recommendations of this present volume and of the previous volume, TALIS 2018 (Volume I): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners.

• Chapter 2 explores the prestige of the teaching profession by examining to what extent teachers and school leaders consider their profession is valued in society. The chapter also contrasts teachers’ and school leaders’ levels of job satisfaction with both their working environments and their profession and how they have changed over time. It also describes the level of stress teachers report experiencing in their work and explores the sources of stress. The chapter concludes by examining how teachers’ perceptions of their working conditions are related to the risk of attrition.

• Chapter 3 depicts the working conditions of teachers and school leaders, including appraisal processes, as well as their satisfaction with them. It begins by discussing job security among teachers, along with the prevalence of part-time work for teachers and principals, and teaching in multiple schools. The chapter then reviews the characteristics of formal teacher appraisal procedures: the agents conducting appraisals, the methods used and the consequences of these evaluations. Finally, it discusses teachers’ and principals’ satisfaction with their salary and other working conditions.

• Chapter 4 describes the different ways in which teachers collaborate in classrooms, schools and professional development avenues. It explores how often teachers engage in collaborative activities and how that shapes the wider dimensions of the teaching profession, such as expertise and job satisfaction. It further examines teachers’ collegiality – i.e. the quality of interpersonal relationships between colleagues in schools – which provides the basis for a collaborative working environment. The second part of the chapter discusses feedback received by teachers, a unique form of collaboration, and examines how specific types of feedback can help teachers to improve their practices.

• Chapter 5 describes the levels of autonomy and leadership in schools. It first identifies the tasks where schools have a larger role than out-of-school authorities and then compares the responsibilities of teachers and school leaders for the different tasks. The chapter concludes by describing the prevalence of different forms of leadership for teachers and school leaders.

• Annex A contains information about the TALIS target populations, the TALIS samples and a summary of the adjudication outcomes for each sample, along with cautionary notes about the interpretations of results, whenever necessary.

• Annex B contains information about complex variables derived from the teacher and principal questionnaires analysed in the volume, and statistical methods used to analyse TALIS data.

• Annex C contains the full list of online result tables.

• Annex D lists the members of the TALIS Governing Board, managers in the TALIS national centres, members of the OECD Secretariat, members of the TALIS Consortium, and members of TALIS expert groups that contributed to the TALIS 2018 cycle.

References

[2] Ainley, J. and R. Carstens (2018), “Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018 Conceptual Framework”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 187, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/799337c2-en.

[4] OECD (2016), School Leadership for Learning: Insights from TALIS 2013, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264258341-en.

[3] OECD (2014), TALIS 2013 Results: An International Perspective on Teaching and Learning, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264196261-en.

[6] UNESCO (2016), Education 2030: Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action for the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4, UNESCO, Paris, http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/education-2030-incheon-framework-for-action-implementation-of-sdg4-2016-en_2.pdf.

[1] UNESCO-UIS (2012), International Standard Classification of Education: ISCED 2011, UNESCO Institute for Statistics, Montreal, http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/international-standard-classification-of-education-isced-2011-en.pdf.

[5] United Nations (2015), Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, United Nations, New York, NY, http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E.

Notes

← 1. The Flemish Community of Belgium and the French Community of Belgium also participated in TALIS 2018 as a sub-national entity of Belgium.

← 2. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 3 option.

← 3. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 4. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 5. On 25 May 2018, the OECD Council invited Colombia to become a Member. While Colombia is included in the OECD averages reported in this publication, at the time of its preparation, Colombia was in the process of completing its domestic procedures for ratification and the deposit of Colombia’s instrument of accession to the OECD Convention was pending.

← 6. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 3 option.

← 7. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 8. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 9. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 10. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 11. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 12. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 13. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 3 option.

← 14. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 3 option.

← 15. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 16. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 3 option.

← 17. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 18. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 3 option.

← 19. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 20. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 3 option.

← 21. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 22. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 3 option.

← 23. Chinese Taipei and Cyprus did not participate directly in TALIS 2018: their data collection and processing were managed exclusively by the international research consortium. Their data are reported in the result tables listed in Annex C.

← 24. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 3 option.

← 25. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 26. Chinese Taipei and Cyprus did not participate directly in TALIS 2018: their data collection and processing were managed exclusively by the international research consortium. Their data are reported in the result tables listed in Annex C.

← 27. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 3 option.

← 28. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.

← 29. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 3 option.

← 30. Countries and economies that participated in the ISCED 1 option.