Quality education for all –UNESCAP/LCD Conference on Disability-inclusive MDG‘s and Aid Effectiveness: a workshop contribution

The presentation gives an overview of some OECD data on inclusion of children with disabilities, difficulties and disadvantages, on how they fare in mainstream education, and on the relationship between disability and socio-economic background. It discusses PISA insights on quality and equity of education (the systems performing well in PISA often have high levels of equity) and offers several policy options for supporting inclusiveness and disadvanted students and schools.

1. Quality education for all Disability-inclusive MDG‘s and Aid Effectiveness – a workshop contribution Bangkok, 14-16 March 2012 Mihaylo Milovanovitch OECD Directorate For Education

2. The challenge % of people who have not completed upper secondary education by age group Source: OECD PISA 2009

3. Structure Good education = equitable education What do we know about the quality & equity of education for SENDDD children? Policy options

4. Good education = equitable education

5. Low average performance Large socio-economic disparities High average performance Large socio-economic disparities Low average performance High social equity High average performance High social equity Strong socio-economic impact on student performance Socially equitable distribution of learning opportunities High reading performance Low reading performance

6. Quality & equity of education for SENDDD children

7. Sources of comparative information Source: OECD PISA 2003 Programme for International Student Assessment – PISA (2003 and 2006) Data collection and comparisons through the OECD SENDDD framework Qualitative research in the framework of the No More Failures: Ten Steps to Equity in Education OECD project. Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS)

8. The socio-economic background of SEN students in SEE and the Baltic, 2006 School grade of 15 year olds who took the PISA test Source: OECD PISA 2006; Note: data has limited statistical significance due to small sample

9. SEN students’ educational experience and expectations     Not SEN Functional Disability Intellectual Disability Limited Language Proficiency Other     ISCED Level % % % % % Pre-Primary (0)             Did not attend 11.8 10.9 11.4 26.3 8.5   Attended 24.3 25.9 36.2 25.7 23.1   Attended > 1 year 63.8 63.3 52.4 48.1 68.4 Primary (1)             Have not repeated 91.6 87.7 74.5 83.6 72.8   Repeated 7.5 10.5 22.1 14.6 25.8   Repeated > Once 1.0 1.8 3.4 1.8 1.3 Lower Secondary (2)             Have not repeated 93.2 96.0 89.2 88.7 94.8   Repeated 6.3 3.6 9.4 10.5 5.2   Repeated > Once 0.5 0.4 1.4 0.7 0.0 Upper Secondary (3)             Have not repeated 97.3 96.9 97.0 96.6 97.3   Repeated 2.7 2.3 2.8 3.1 2.7   Repeated > Once 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.0           Source: OECD PISA 2003

10. The socio-economic background of SEN students in SEE and the Baltic, 2006 Family background Source: OECD PISA 2006; Note: data has limited statistical significance due to small sample

11. Comparison of student mathematics performance by SEN status Source: OECD PISA 2003

12. Percentage of resilient students among disadvantaged students Source: OECD PISA 2009

13. Performance in reading of non-SEN and SEN students in SEE and the Baltic, PISA 2006 Source: OECD PISA 2006; Note: data has limited statistical significance due to small sample

14. Policy options

15. Improving equity and reducing school failure is a policy priority

16. Support disadvantaged and inclusive schools

17. TALIS 2012 - Teacher training SEN is named as area of greatest need for professional development 17

18. Difference between observed and predicted performance in advantaged schools, by students’ socio-economic background Source: OECD PISA 2009

19. So, what can be done? Identify the student population at risk, and cater to its needs Eliminate system level obstacles to equity Support disadvantaged or challenged schools

20. Reading performance, by immigrant status Source: OECD PISA 2009

21. The challenge: to reduce the risk of low achievement due to personal circumstances (fairness) Relative risk of scoring below level 2 depending on personal circumstances Low risk High risk Source: OECD PISA 2009