IMPROVING ACCESS, QUALITY AND EQUITY IN ECEC: AN OECD ... · • Poor quality ECEC can lead to both...
Transcript of IMPROVING ACCESS, QUALITY AND EQUITY IN ECEC: AN OECD ... · • Poor quality ECEC can lead to both...
IMPROVING ACCESS, QUALITY
AND EQUITY IN ECEC:
AN OECD PERSPECTIVE
20 May 2016Marco KoolsDirectorate for Education and Skills, OCDE
Early childhood education and care
Primary and lower secondary education
Upper secondary general and vocational education
Tertiary education
2
Reviews of National Policies for
Education: Education in Latvia
3
Strengths, challenges and recommendations
Early childhood education and care
Primary and lower secondary education
Upper secondary general and vocational education
Tertiary education
4
Why invest in high-quality early childhood
education and care (ECEC)?
Early childhood education and care
Primary and lower secondary education
Upper secondary general and vocational education
Tertiary education
• Can enhance children’s cognitive, linguistic, emotional
and social development
5
ECEC – “the potential for good”
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Bra
in s
en
sit
ivit
y
Age in years
Language numbers peer social skills emotional control
Low
High
• Can help boost educational achievement
• Can be an investment in good citizenship
• Can limit the early establishment of disadvantage,
narrow economic and social gaps and promote social
inclusion
6
ECEC – “the potential for good”
• Investing in ECEC is a cost-effective strategy for
promoting economic growth
7
ECEC – “the potential for good”
• Poor quality ECEC can lead to both immediate and long-
term harm, including when care outside the home is ‘too
early and for too long’
8
Poor quality ECEC – “the potential for harm”
• Poor quality ECEC can lead to both immediate and long-
term harm, including when care outside the home is ‘too
early and for too long’
Increased focuses on monitoring the quality of ECEC
among OECD countries
9
Poor quality ECEC – “the potential for harm”
10
Strengths
Early childhood education and care
Primary and lower secondary education
Upper secondary general and vocational education
Tertiary education
11
Participation in ECEC is high and starts early
in Latvia
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
under age of 3 aged 3 aged 4 aged 5 aged 6 aged 7
% 2002 2003 2006 2009 2012
Net enrolment rate of children up to age 7, 2002-2012
Enrolment rate at age 3 in ECEC, 2013
12
Participation rates for 3- and 4-year-olds
above the OECD average
0102030405060708090
100
Isra
el
Fra
nce
Belg
ium
United K
ingd
om
Den
mark
New
Zea
lan
dIc
ela
nd
Sp
ain
Norw
ay
Italy
Sw
ed
en
Germ
any
Esto
nia
Slo
ve
nia
Neth
erland
sLatv
iaJapan
Port
ugal
OE
CD
avera
ge
Austr
iaLuxem
bo
urg
Fin
land
Slo
va
k R
epublic
Austr
alia
Czech R
ep
ublic
Pola
nd
Chile
Ire
lan
dM
exic
oU
nited S
tate
sT
urk
ey
Sw
itzerland
Early childhood educational programmes (ISCED 01)
Pre-primary education (ISCED 02)
Pre-primary education (ISCED 02) (2005)
13
Entitlement to an ECEC place from 1.5 years old
Jurisdiction Starting
age of
compulsory
school
Age of
children
Entitlement to
a place in ECEC
Entitlement to
free access
Legal
entitlement
Hours/week Free access
entitlement
Hours/week
Latvia 5 0-1.5 none a
1.5-6 universal No central
regulation
unconditional
Belgium-Flemish
Community
6 2.5-5 universal 23.33 unconditional 23.33
France 6 0-2 none a conditional 40
3-5 universal 24 unconditional 24
Italy 6 3-5 universal 40 unconditional 40
Luxembourg 4 0-3 none a conditional 3
3-5 universal 26 unconditional ≤26
Mexico 3 0-2 none a targeted m
3-5 universal 15-20 unconditional 15-20
Netherlands 5 0-4 none a targeted 10
Norway 6 1-5 universal 41 none a
Slovenia 6 11 months-
5 years
universal 45 conditional 45
Sweden 7 1-2 universal 15-50 none a
3-6 universal 15-50 unconditional 15
UK-England 5 2 none a conditional 15
3-4 none a unconditional 15
Expenditure on ECEC (age 3 and older) as a percentage of GDP (2011)
14
High expenditure level on ECEC and large
share of public spending
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
Den
mar
k
Icel
and
Spa
in
Latv
ia
Slo
veni
a
Luxe
mbo
urg
Chi
le
Sw
eden
Pol
and
Fra
nce
Isra
el
Bel
gium
Mex
ico
New
Zea
land
OE
CD
ave
rage
Aus
tria
Ger
man
y
Nor
way
Cze
ch R
epub
lic
Italy
Slo
vak
Rep
ublic
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
Fin
land
Net
herla
nds
Est
onia
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
Por
tuga
l
Kor
ea
Japa
n
Aus
tral
ia
% Public Private
At-risk-of-poverty rate for children under age 6
15
Poverty among young children has been
decreasing
0
5
10
15
20
25
Fin
land
Neth
erland
s
Ire
lan
d
Czech…
Den
mark
Norw
ay
Sw
itzerland
Germ
any
United…
Icela
nd
Slo
ve
nia
Fra
nce
Sw
ed
en
Belg
ium
Esto
nia
EU
27
Latv
ia
Slo
va
kia
Austr
ia
Pola
nd
Lithuan
ia
Luxem
bo
urg
Hun
gary
Po
rtu
ga
l
Spain
Italy
Gre
ece
% 2013 2010
16
Challenges and areas for further improvement
Early childhood education and care
Primary and lower secondary education
Upper secondary general and vocational education
Tertiary education
Formal childcare by duration - % over the population of 0-2 year-olds (2014)
17
Despite recent progress participation of
the youngest children is still relatively low
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Denm
ark
Sw
ede
n
No
rwa
y
Belg
ium
Luxe
mb
ou
rg
Ne
the
rla
nds
Port
ug
al
Icela
nd
Fra
nce
Spa
in
Slo
ven
ia
Sw
itze
rla
nd
Fin
land
Un
ited
Kin
gd
om
Ire
land
EU
27
Germ
any
Italy
Lithu
ania
Latv
ia
Esto
nia
Austr
ia
Hung
ary
Gre
ece
Slo
vakia
Cze
ch R
ep
ub
lic
Pola
nd
% 30 hours or over From 1 to 29 hours
18
Participation in ECEC is unequal across
Latvia
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Institutions in urban areas (left axis) Institutions in rural areas (left axis)
Enrolment in urban areas, thsd (right axis) Enrolment in rural areas, thsd (right axis)
Age distribution of ECEC teachers
19
Barriers to developing a high-quality and
motivated ECEC profession
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Norw
ay
Belg
ium
Un
ited
Kin
gd
om
Austr
ia
Pola
nd
Slo
ven
ia
Luxe
mb
ou
rg
Fra
nce
Germ
any
Sw
itze
rla
nd
Spa
in
Latv
ia
Neth
erla
nds
Czech R
ep
ub
lic
Esto
nia
Lithu
ania
50 years or over 40 to 49 30 to 39 less than 30
Differences in mathematics performance, by attendance at pre-primary school
20
Need for strengthening data collection,
monitoring and use of research
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Fra
nce
Slo
vak R
epu
blic
Belg
ium
Italy
Sw
itze
rla
nd
Cze
ch R
ep
ub
lic
Isra
el
Denm
ark
Germ
any
United
Kin
gd
om
Gre
ece
Spa
in
Ja
pa
n
Fin
land
Pola
nd
Sw
ede
n
Austr
alia
Ne
w Z
eala
nd
OE
CD
ave
rag
e
Neth
erla
nds
Austr
ia
Luxe
mb
ou
rg
Me
xic
o
Icela
nd
Port
ug
al
Tu
rkey
Cana
da
Norw
ay
Lithu
ania
Ch
ile
Kore
a
United
Sta
tes
Slo
ven
ia
Ire
land
Latv
ia
Esto
nia
Sco
re-p
oin
t d
iffe
ren
ce
betw
een
stu
de
nts
wh
o
att
end
ed
pre
-prim
ary
sch
oo
l fo
r m
ore
th
an
one
ye
ar
and
th
ose
wh
o h
ad
not a
tte
nd
ed
Before accounting for socio-economic status
After accounting for socio-economic status
21
Governance and financing hamper equal
access to quality ECEC
• Latvia provides supplementary funding for children with
additional educational needs.
• The financial support is only provided for those children
in special ECEC institutions and not those who are
enrolled in regular ECEC institutions
22
Governance and financing hamper equal
access to quality ECEC
23
Recommendations
Early childhood education and care
Primary and lower secondary education
Upper secondary general and vocational education
Tertiary education
• Continue expanding access to ECEC services for
children aged three and younger
• Shifting policy attention to children living in rural areas
where participation is low
• Option of lowering the age of compulsory ECEC to 4
years which is likely to benefit children in rural areas in
particular
24
Continue expanding ECEC, in particular in
rural areas and for the youngest children
• Well-designed career structure, includes reviewing
salaries of staff
• Build head teachers capacity to assess staff, including
for providing effective feedback and support for
professional development
• National standards for ECEC staff – outlining
professional expectations al all career stages
25
Take a strategic approach to improving the
quality and motivation of ECEC staff
26
Example of ECEC standards from New
Zealand
• Consider investigating the quality of initial education and
professional development programmes
– E.g. there is an apparent need for strengthening the
preparation for identifying and working with children
with special needs
• Strategic workforce planning should be based on
projections and regular discussions between MoES and
municipalities
27
Take a strategic approach to improving the
quality and motivation of ECEC staff
28
Strengthen data collection, monitoring
and use of research
Monitoring staff
quality
Monitoring service quality
Monitoring child development &
outcomes
• Systematic monitoring of developmental outcomes of
children & the quality of ECEC staff
• Promote and provide clear guidance to municipalities on
how to conduct school self-evaluations
• Consider expanding State Education Quality Service’s
mandate to evaluate ECEC programmes
• Increase efforts to collect and disseminate good practice
to enhance peer learning
29
Strengthen data collection, monitoring and
use of research
• In particular funds should promote integration of
children with special needs in regular ECEC
institutions
• Staff in poorer municipalities should have equal
access to professional development e.g. through
discretionary funding or targeted programmes
• Stronger public accountability to data collection,
monitoring and research
• Ensure well-functioning equalization fund
• More targeted approach to child and family benefits
30
Review the governance and financing
arrangements of ECEC
Thank you
WWW.OECD.ORG/[email protected]