Labour, education and skills: Building a
clever Australia
Barry McGaw
Melbourne Graduate School of Education, University of Melbourne
Chair, Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority
Natstats 2010 – Measuring what counts:
Economic development, wellbeing and progress
Sydney, 15 Sep 2010
Outline of presentation

International indicators of
educational performance



Improving Australian educational
performance




Quality
Equity
Contribution of reform
Contribution of indicators
Role of the My School website
Minimising risk of perverse
impact of indicators
International indicators of educational
performance
Quality of students’ achievements
600
350
OECD (2003), Literacy skills for the world of tomorrow: Further results from PISA 2000, Fig. 2.5, p.76.
300
Finland
Canada
New Zealand
Australia
Ireland
Hong Kong-China
Korea
United Kingdom
Japan
Sweden
Austria
Belgium
Iceland
Norway
France
United States
Denmark
Switzerland
Spain
Czech Republic
Italy
Germany
Liechtenstein
Hungary
Poland
Greece
Portugal
Russian Federation
Latvia
Israel
Luxembourg
Thailand
Bulgaria
Romania
Mexico
Argentina
Chile
Brazil
FYR Macedonia
Indonesia
Albania
Peru
Mean reading results (PISA 2000)
Australia tied for 2nd
with 8 others
among 42 countries.
550
500
450
400
Australia’s ranking in OECD/PISA Reading

Reading ranks



PISA 2000: 4th but tied for 2nd
PISA 2003: 4th but tied for 2nd
PISA 2006: 7th but tied for 6th
PISA 2000
PISA 2003
PISA 2006
Finland
Finland
Finland
Korea
Canada
NZ
Hong Kong
Korea
Canada
NZ
Hong Kong
Korea
Canada
NZ
Ahead of
Australia
Same as
Australia
Behind
Australia
Hong Kong
Trends in reading performance
560
Korea
550
Finland
540
Hong Kong
530
Canada
New
Zealand
520
Australia
Poland
510
500
490
480
470
PISA 2000
PISA 2003
PISA 2006
Trends in Australian reading performances
700
95th %ile
650
90th %ile
600
75th %ile
550
Mean
500
25th %ile
450
400
10th %ile
5th %ile
350
300
PISA 2000
PISA 2003
PISA 2006
OECD (2007), PISA 2006: science competencies for tomorrow’s world, Vol. 1 - analysis, Fig. 6.21, p.319.
Australia’s ranking in mathematics and science
Mathematics
• PISA 2000
• PISA 2003
6th among 42 countries but tied for 3rd
11th among 40 countries but tied for 5th
• PISA 2006
13th among 57 countries but tied for 9th
Science
• PISA 2000
• PISA 2003
• PISA 2006
8th among 42 countries but tied for 3rd
6th among 40 countries but tied for 4th
8th among 57 countries but tied for 4th
Equity in students’ achievements
Social gradients for science (PISA 2006)
575
High quality
Low equity
High quality
High equity
Finland
550
Japan
New Zealand
Australia
United Kingdom GermanyNetherlands
AustriaSwitzerland
Ireland
Czech Republic Belgium
Hungary
Sweden
Poland
Denmark
France
Norway
United States Slovak Republic Luxembourg
Greece
Science literacy
525
500
475
Canada
Korea
Spain
Italy
Iceland
Portugal
450
425
Turkey
Low quality
Low equity
400
-15,0
Low quality
Mexico
High equity
-10,0
-5,0
0,0
5,0
10,0
Social equity (OECD regression slope - country regression slope)
OECD (2007) PISA 2006: science competencies for tomorrow’s world, Vol 1 – analysis, Figure 4.6, p.184.
15,0
SES-science correlations (PISA 2006)
575
High quality
Low equity
Finland
High quality
High equity
550
New Zealand
Australia
Netherlands
Czech Republic United Kingdom
Germany
Belgium
Ireland
Switzerland Austria
Hungary
Sweden
Poland
Denmark
France
United States
Spain
Slovak Republic
Luxembourg
Italy
Greece
Portugal
Science literacy
525
500
475
Canada
Japan
Korea
Iceland
Norway
450
425
Turkey
Low quality
Low equity
400
-10,0
-8,0
Low quality
High equity
Mexico
-6,0
-4,0
-2,0
0,0
2,0
4,0
6,0
Social equity (% variation accounted for: OECD-country)
OECD (2007) PISA 2006: science competencies for tomorrow’s world, Vol 1 – analysis, Figure 4.6, p.184.
8,0
10,0
Variation in reading performance (PISA 2000)
Variation of performance
within schools
OECD, UNESCO (2003), Literacy skills for tomorrow’s world: further results from PISA 2000, Table 7.1a, p.357.
Iceland
Sweden
Finland
Norway
Spain
Ireland
Canada
Denmark
Korea
New Zealand
Australia
United Kingdom
Luxembourg
United States
Portugal
Mexico
Switzerland
Italy
Czech Republic
Greece
Poland
Austria
Hungary
Germany
Variation of performance
between schools
Belgium
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
-60
-70
-80
Variation in reading performance (PISA 2000)
Variation of performance
within schools
68%
32%
Variation explained by social background of students
Variation not explained by social background of students
OECD, UNESCO (2003), Literacy skills for tomorrow’s world: further results from PISA 2000, Table 7.1a, p.357.
The storyline so far…

Messages from international
indicators


Quality is high in Australian schools
Equity is relatively low & schools
contribute to this
Improving Australia’s educational
performance.
Improving Australia’s educational performance

Contribution of reform
 National curriculum
 Teacher and school development

Contribution of indicators
 National Assessment Program (NAP)

Sample-based surveys




Full-cohort assessments


Science
ICT Literacy
Civics and citizenship
Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN)
My School website
Primary school with disadvantaged students
My School 2010 – school result (format being considered)
My School 2010 – comparisons (format being considered)
Comparison with other disadvantaged schools
There is a very clever and clear
display being proposed for 2010 in
place of the one in the previous slide.
Focusing on distribution not particular cut points
The storyline so far…

Messages from international
indicators



Quality is high in Australian schools
Equity is relatively low & schools
contribute to this
Improving Australian education

Curriculum reform




Defining clear learning entitlements
Setting high expectations for all
Teacher development
Use of ‘fair’ comparisons among schools

Learning from others doing better in
similar circumstances
Minimising the risk of perverse impact of
indicators.
Minimising risk of perverse consequences

Ensuring appropriateness of NAPLAN tests
 Preparing students for tests

Ensuring familiarity is all that practice can add
 Literacy and numeracy are developed in full curriculum
 Broadening the literacy and numeracy tests


Test a broader range of content and skills
Have different students take different tests
 Curriculum provides public declaration of students’ full
learning entitlements

Ensuring appropriateness of like-school comparisons
 Socio-educational advantage without ecological fallacy
 Taking account of special sub-populations in schools
The full storyline

Messages from international
indicators



Quality is high in Australian schools
Equity is relatively low & schools
contribute to this
Improving Australian education

Curriculum reform




Teacher development
Use of ‘fair’ comparisons among schools


Defining clear learning entitlements
Setting high expectations for all
Learning from others doing better in
similar circumstances
Balancing benefits and risks of
indicators
barry.mcgaw@mcgawgroup.org
www.acara.edu.au