EDUCATION

Investing in education has been central to Finland’s efforts for competitiveness, and the ambition of education policy is to ensure that the entire population has access to education and training. Generally speaking, Finnish people have a high standard of education, and the principle of lifelong learning is important in all education provisions. Basic education is free, and municipalities are responsible for providing education to all local children. Also, basic education must be provided near a pupil’s home. There are about 4,000 comprehensive schools in Finland, and each year some 60,000 children start the first grade. By and large, the education system has met with undeniable success. In the OECD’s Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), Finland has consistently been among the highest scorers worldwide, and in tertiary education, the World Economic Forum has ranked Finland first in the world in enrollment and quality and second in mathematics and science education. There are some 20 universities and some 30 polytechnics in the country, and although entrance examinations require a relatively high level of knowledge, some 60% to 70% of each annual cohort enters higher education. However, the need to adapt to present globalization processes in the field of education tends to blur the distinction between vocational and academic qualifications, and may pose in the future a threat to the quality of the Finnish system.

Canada has many strengths in the education area, including: the OECD’s highest proportion of the population aged 20-64 with post-secondary education, a number of world-class universities, a high completion rate for high school, and very high PISA scores. Nevertheless, a number of issues remain outstanding. Probably the biggest deficiency in education policy has been the failure to reduce the gap in educational attainment between the Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal populations (Sharpe et al., 2007 and 2010). Other education and training policy issues include the low completion rate for apprenticeship programs (Sharpe and Gibson, 2006), threats to the accessibility of higher education related to large hikes in tuition; low levels of functional literacy in the workplace; and inadequate levels of employer training.
With education being largely a provincial responsibility, there is growing evidence that the economically stronger provinces have better education systems (e.g., more resources dedicated to students with learning disabilities) than the relatively less wealthy provinces.

Education policy was in the past characterized by a paradox. On one hand participation indicators in secondary and tertiary education were average to low. On the other hand, the country’s PISA results have been impressive. The outgoing Labour-led government responded to this with a number of reforms which have led to a remarkable increase in student numbers in tertiary education. This is true as well for the ethnic minority population. The new National-led government in the period under review announced its plan to continue these efforts in its Tertiary Education Strategy 2010-2015. At the same time, financial pressures have led to policy changes, such as new systems for funding universities which limit student enrollment. With regard to job-based continuing education, the New Zealand economy has followed the tradition of Anglo-American liberal market economies (LMEs) that invest more extensively in transferable skills, independent from current jobs rather than in job-based training as some continental European coordinated economies (CMEs) do.

Australia’s education system is complex, with shared responsibilities between the states and the Commonwealth, and with funding coming mainly from the Commonwealth. During the period of the Liberal government between 1996 and 2007, there were substantial cuts to education funding, particularly in the universities, with some associated adverse effects on quality. While equity of access to high-quality education remained good at all education levels under the Liberal government, there was nonetheless some deterioration in this regard, in particular due to increased funding of private schools and growth in full (upfront) fee higher education courses.

The Labor government elected in 2007 has sought to reverse these trends. Emphasis was placed on: improving learning outcomes; implementing a national school curriculum; increasing school retention rates; and providing more funding for schools, vocational education and training, higher education and research.

In order to achieve these goals, the government has announced a number of funding initiatives in the review period, including increased resources to schools in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas, increased funding for vocational training in schools, funding for 711,000 training places targeting low-skilled jobseekers, AUD 2 billion for computers in schools, and a AUD14.7 billion program to construct new buildings in 9,500 schools across Australia (as part of the 2009 fiscal stimulus). In addition, an agreement reached with the States and Territories in October 2008, backed by AUD 970 million in additional funding over five years, to achieve universal access to a quality early childhood education program for all children in the year before school. These initiatives have not been without controversy, with claims of wastefulness in the school building program and failure to meet the election commitment of providing computers to every second school student in a timely manner.

To implement the national schools curriculum, the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) was established. To date, discussions about the curriculum with stakeholders are ongoing. However, one important – and somewhat controversial – development on this front has been the introduction of the National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN), which commenced in Australian schools in 2008. Administered by ACARA, under the program, all students in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 are assessed annually on the same days using national tests in Reading, Writing, Language Conventions (Spelling, Grammar and Punctuation) and Numeracy. ACARA is also responsible for a controversial website, myschool.edu.au, which provides NAPLAN test and other information about schools so as to allow parents to evaluate the performance of schools.

In the higher education sector, the federal government has abolished all full fee undergraduate courses at public universities for Australian students. It has also established two systems for assessing university performance, the Australian Universities Quality Agency and the Research Quality Framework, the later being abolished by the incoming Labor government in 2007 and replaced by the Excellence in Research for Australia program administered by the Australian Research Council, the first round of which will be completed in late 2010.

Public expenditure on education has increased in recent years. However, there are some concerns that need to be addressed. First, teacher pay has been inadequate in comparison with private sector salaries. Previously, this meant that every year it proved difficult to fill vacant jobs at primary and secondary schools. Low pay resulted in a large number of underqualified teachers. The economic crisis has changed this, however. Salaries have decreased in the private sector as well, and the tight job market has attracted qualified teachers back to the schools.
Second, and more seriously, the average Icelander aged 25 to 64 has up to two fewer years of schooling than the OECD average. This means that Iceland’s labor force is on average less well educated than it should be. Finally, Iceland’s universities have long been seriously underfunded, even during the boom years. There are seven universities, two private but supported by state grants and five state institutions, including two agricultural colleges. Due to the economic crisis, the government is considering plans to rationalize the university sector either by reducing the number of universities or by inducing more cooperation between them. It is not clear whether this is possible to do without reducing the quality of the education provided. Equity is mainly preserved by the student loan system, which makes it possible for students to pay their fees and living costs while studying either in Iceland or abroad. The University of Iceland, the largest of the seven by far (with 15,000 students), is not permitted by law to levy tuition.

During the period under review, few policy areas were more heatedly debated in Sweden than education policy. Education and retraining has been seen as integral to economic competitiveness and facilitating a structural change in the economy from a base in industry to a base in research and development. Life-long learning and continuing education have been important policy objectives towards those ends. From a comparative point of view (and referring to the Eurostat database), life-long learning is mostly spread in Sweden (and other Nordic countries).
The current government has aggressively pursued a policy that introduces a more strict education, not least in terms of grades and assessments but also in regard to order in the classroom. In terms of the education policy aimed at providing a skilled labor force, the government has taken issue with the education policy of previous governments that emphasized everyone’s right and entitlement to higher education. The current policy departs from this by suggesting that perhaps not everyone is suitable and qualified for tertiary education but would be better off in education and training programs that lead to practical work and immediate employment. This policy should help provide a labor force both for manufacturing industry and also for more knowledge-intensive types of businesses. Nevertheless, Sweden has today a very highly skilled labor force.
Sweden’s graduate output of upper secondary and tertiary education is fair. In upper secondary education, education policy emphasizes that schools should make a strong effort to get as many students as possible to graduate with passing grades at least in the core topics of the curriculum, Swedish, English and Mathematics. It should be noted, however, that the introduction of New Public Management instruments in the school sector, including competition among public schools and so-called “free schools”, has created incentives for schools to boost grades. National tests are conducted regularly to prevent such developments.
Equitable access to education has long been a keystone of education policy; this harks back to the early days of Social Democracy and the then apparent difficulties for working-class students to get access to higher education. The biggest problem today in this respect is probably second generation immigrants who might face bigger obstacles to enter higher education compared to Swedish children.

Switzerland’s education system is strongly influenced by the federal and decentralized structure of the country, as education policy falls under the jurisdiction of the cantons and municipalities. The system provides a high-quality education. The university system performs very well, as is the case in many other small and open European countries. Vocational training is very solid, and seems to be one of the most important factors in the low levels of unemployment, particularly among younger people. The permeability of vocational and tertiary education has improved as compared to other countries.
The tertiary education system continues to discriminate against students from families with low social status and – probably as a related effect (see also Integration Policy) – foreigners born in the country.
The Bologna reforms are now well under way in Switzerland. However, some experts claim that this process is detrimental to the quality of the technical colleges (Fachhochschulen), and that with academization, vocational training loses its high reputation.

Primary and secondary schools are compulsory and free (or inexpensive) to all, and private funding of education is still an exception. Although the PISA scores in Belgium are rather good on an aggregate basis, they show substantial variation. Various authors have shown that most of this variance can be explained by the economic background of families and by segregation: Belgium is the second-most segregated European country in terms of schooling. Many authors argue that part of the explanation lies in the early differentiation of students by education tracks (classical secondary education as opposed to vocational schools), which de facto excludes many students as young as 12 from future attendance at a tertiary education institution. Another point frequently raised is that a large share of the budget is used to pay for students repeating school years. The wage premium for tertiary education is estimated to be among the lowest in Europe, but this is partly mitigated by the relatively low cost of Belgian universities. In general, universities and higher education institutions deliver quite good training, in spite of their relatively modest level of resources and their small or medium size in international comparison.

The Czech Republic has a relatively well-functioning system of vocational training, and one of the highest proportions of people with secondary education in the OECD. Enrollment in tertiary education, on the other hand, is still relatively low. Although this figure has doubled over the last two decades, no more than 13% of the Czech population has a tertiary degree. Part of the problem is the low public spending on education.
The Topolánek government began work on a major reform of student finance in higher education. This was to introduce tuition fees alongside a system of grants and loans that were intended to remove students from immediate dependence on parental support. There was strong opposition to the proposal and it was not pushed forward by the Fischer government.

Denmark claims top levels in education spending, but not in achievement.
Danish pupils have not scored well on Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) problem-solving tests. After the 2003 PISA results the government realized that something had to be done. At the time Denmark was 16th among 30 OECD countries in reading, but the result was worst in science, where Denmark was 31st out of 40 participating countries. In math, Danish pupils were 13th among the 30 OECD countries, but 15% to 16% of pupils had completely insufficient math competences.

The PISA results led to various efforts to improve Danish schools. As part of the government’s 2006 globalization strategy, reforms of primary and lower secondary school system were announced. “Academic standards need to be raised considerably in the core subjects of reading, mathematics, science and English. Evaluation and testing should give teachers, parents and pupils a clear idea of where particular focus is needed. Teachers should become subject specialists. The schools’ management should be strong and visible, and the local authorities’ responsibility for academic results should be crystal clear.”

It is a target that 95% of young Danes should complete a general or vocational upper secondary education program. At least 50% of young people should complete a higher education program.

In 2006 Denmark moved up, to 18th in science, a result seen as still not good enough. Teacher training overall has to improve and attitudes toward education reform have to change.

Currently a thorough review of Denmark’s basic schooling system, called a “360-degrees review” is in process.

A special problem is the fact that non-Western students score markedly lower than Danish students, a problem in particular for boys. However, second-generation students do relatively better than first-generation students.

Koreans are well known for their focus on education and good performance on tests such as the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). The country’s tertiary education enrollment rate is high. Education policies are hotly debated, and are an important priority for the government. About 16% of the general government budget is earmarked for education, considerably more than the 13% OECD average.
However, the Korean government budget is small compared to other OECD countries; thus, education spending accounts for a 4.5% share of GDP, as compared to an OECD average of 4.9%. Government spending on university education is particularly low, supporting only about 10% of the student population. By contrast, private education expenditure is 2.9% of GDP, by far the highest level in the OECD and about three times the OECD average. Thus, much of the success of Korean education can be attributed to parents’ willingness to pay for education rather than to public policies.
Almost all parties involved in the field of higher education agree that a change in the Korean system is both necessary and of high priority. There are many complaints about the curriculum content and the authoritarian teaching styles at Korean schools and universities. A particularly controversial issue focuses on entrance exams, which critics see as a major cause of weak analytical and debating skills. Often, cramming is favored over analytic skills, discussion and creativity.

The quality of primary and secondary education in the United States is often judged mediocre. High school graduation rates, although rising from 1996 to 2006, remain low, at about 70%, in an education system that largely lacks vocationally oriented alternatives to high school. High students’ performance in science, math and reading is below average compared with other OECD countries. The shortcomings cannot be attributed to a lack of resources, as per pupil expenditures have been growing in real terms, and student/teacher ratios have declined since the 1960s. The problems of the U.S. educational system are primarily the result of cultural and social change, the impact of unionization and collective bargaining on teacher performance, and deficiencies in the home environments of many children in low-income, minority neighborhoods. The excellence movement in education has brought some changes through accountability checks and test measures to identify good schools and sound methods to motivate higher teacher and student performance. But no reliable measuring sticks have been developed. Reform of the teaching profession has encountered intense union opposition. School vouchers play a marginal role, while charter schools, which are exempt from some state regulation and operate under more parent involvement, are the most dynamic institutions in the system. They enroll only 2% of the student population and have had only a small impact on the system. The impact of student testing on teacher performance is unclear.
Federal involvement in education has increased under the Obama administration. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) provided additional funds for stabilizing the education budgets of state governments in order to restore displaced education spending in K-12 schools and higher education institutions, as well as to make funds available for school construction and modernization. Altogether, $73 billion was provided for education and training. But this has to be taken in the context of substantial cuts in state education budgets. The Obama administration continued the most ambitious effort at educational standard-setting by reauthorizing the No Child Left Behind Act initiated by the Bush administration, which mandates testing, teacher evaluations tied to test scores and sanctions (closing nonperforming schools or turning them into charter schools). Under Obama, the terms were somewhat modified, but the goal is still quite ambitious: to prepare all students for college and careers. How this is to be measured is left to the states.

French education is centralized and mainly state-run (however, private, mostly Catholic, schools make up approximately 20% of the total). France is rated rather well in the PISA study (tenth rank out of 30). Spending on preschool level (nearly all children from three years on attend preschools, or école maternelle) is exemplary and still above the OECD average at the primary level. Generally, the education branch transfer to professional training has been deficient. Organized by the state schools, it has lacked alternate training in cooperation with business, and diplomas are not accepted by firms. This is one of the reasons for high youth unemployment in France. However, in recent times, new formulae of joint training programs with businesses have been established and proven successful.
There is a dualism in tertiary education: between a “selective” sector (comprising some elite schools, other shorter, three-year training programs), which generally is in good financial health and the “non selective” sector (comprising mainly universities), which lacks sufficient resources. France’s performance on tertiary education spending is rather poor. The attrition rate in French universities is high. Some 40% to 50% of students (circa 90,000) leave the system before acquiring a diploma. To make matters worse, the degrees acquired do not assure students of employment (more than half of students are still jobless one year after having left university).
University reform has been a permanent topic on the political agenda but change has been slow in coming. Education is a highly sensitive matter in France; together with corporatist attitudes this tends to inhibit reforms. The new government passed a law in 2007 leading to more autonomy and freedom for universities up to 2010, and strengthening their internal management; moreover, €39 billion has been earmarked in the legislature (2007-2012) to finance universities, and curricula should be revised to be more adaptable to the labor market. But it seems that France is only at the beginning of a profound modernization of its tertiary system.
Social inequality in access to education and qualifications is a sensitive topic. There are persisting inequalities that effectively penalize students of working-class families at the level of university degrees, and flagrantly in access to the elite schools (“grandes écoles”). Social, ethnic and territorial inequalities are very often linked (as a result of massive concentration of poor immigrant families in the suburban zones).

In Germany, the individual states have been almost completely responsible for education policies since 2006. As a consequence, there are no generally binding standards for primary and secondary education, and one can note a significant and increasing divergence of approaches between the states, resulting in diverse educational standards.
In recent years, the states have launched extensive reform projects aimed at improving their educational systems. First, they started to reduce the 13 years previously needed to gain the Abitur, the German degree issued after the completion of secondary schooling. However, there is no consensus on the direction of further reforms, and the states have thus followed very different paths. Simultaneously, the states have begun reforming teachers’ university training as a result of the Bologna reforms. Today, there is no common curricula for bachelor’s or master’s studies for future teachers. As a consequence, the minister for education is trying to shift influence on educational policies back to the federal level.
The government has called education and specifically equality in education one of the most important issues of the future. The most important challenge is to reduce inequality. Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) surveys have shown that there is a significant difference between children with high and low socioeconomic backgrounds. Since the results of the first PISA survey were released, several programs have been established seeking to create a better environment for education, and to facilitate advancement on every education level. Thus, the government and the states have sought to support infant development, particularly in the German language, aiming to reduce inequality in this dimension before the children start their school career. This approach reflects the insights of education researchers who point to the crucial impact of the first years of life on life-long education and labor market successes. So far, the German preschool system and the relatively low standards of qualifications met by kindergarten teachers are not yet appropriate, given the importance of this phase in the life cycle.
The BAföG system of state educational support has been renewed to help disadvantaged students. In addition, to facilitate the international exchange of students, foreign qualifications will soon be accepted more readily.

Education has always been considered to be a strong point in Japan, a country with a Confucian tradition in which parents take great care and often go to significant expense to offer their children good schooling.

However, the Japanese education system faces a number of challenges. One is to deliver adequate quality. To make tertiary education, particularly university education, more effective, the 2001 administrative reform transformed the national universities into independent agencies. However, the recent Review of Tertiary Education in Japan, published in early 2009 by the OECD, found that the indirect influence of the ministry in charge (MEXT) remains high, and recommended that the government “leave detailed operational plans to the institutions.” A second issue is concerned with reconciling the education system’s diverse needs and stakeholders. The inclusion of women is still suboptimal; there are comparatively few graduates in engineering and natural sciences; vocational training needs further support; and the number of foreign students is still small, making up only 2.7% of university-level enrollments. A third issue is the problem of dealing with growing income inequality and the economic downturn. Many citizens who consider the quality of the public school system to be lacking send their children to expensive cram schools; but given economic hardship, poor households may have to give up educational opportunities, future income and social status. In this context, the Tokyo Metropolitan Board of Education allowed schools in its jurisdiction to return to the six-day school week system in early 2010; this is intended to increase quality without forcing parents to pay for extra cram schooling. As for the effects of the recent global economic crisis, many young school and university graduates have been unable to find adequate employment, the highest number since 2000.

The 2007 parliamentary inquiry into educational policy revealed a deep sense of professional crisis, a severe lack of high-quality teachers at all levels of education, and an alarming drop-out rate. Equality and equity are still important characteristics of the Dutch educational system. Policy aims at striving for inclusion of all pupils. This is visible in the accessibility of education. Although compulsory education starts at the age of five, most children start school at the age of four. Education, which emphasizes equality, is open to all students. Key goals of education in the Netherlands include the provision of equal opportunities for participation in society as part of the larger goal of facilitating social cohesion. There are a number of policy measures in place targeting these goals. One of the main policy objectives is to reduce the number of early school dropouts by 50% between 2002 and 2012. As part of this policy, schools receive €2,000 less of government funding for each dropout.

Primary schools in the bigger cities have high numbers of students with non-Western backgrounds. In cities like Amsterdam and Rotterdam, this percentage is more than 80% in some schools. These students start school with considerable deficits, especially concerning language.

During the 2007 – 2008 academic year, 19,000 full-time university students obtained a bachelor’s degree. Although the course of study takes three years, the average student required 4.5 years to complete the requirements for their bachelor’s degree.

Norway has a tradition of very high education attainment. The Norwegian labor force is one of the most educated in the world, as measured by the share of its working population with secondary and tertiary education. Like other Scandinavian countries, the Norwegian government is a high spender on public education. The emphasis of the primarily public school system is on free access and equalization of opportunities. Students with difficulties in learning or socialization receive a high level of attention.
In contrast, there is little emphasis on excellence or on providing specific attention to the most gifted pupils.
In spite of the high levels of educational attainment, there are important shortcomings. The share of degrees in scientific disciplines is low by international standards, and this limits the impact of public investment in education with regard to the country’s competitiveness and capacity for innovation.
On the one hand, this may be because university access is entirely demand-driven, with students able to choose a preferred field of study without any constraint. On the other hand, the country’s high wage compression weakens the incentive for students to self-select in the most socially productive areas.
Another source of major concern is the quality of education in certain areas. In the OECD’s PISA study, Norwegian students’ performance was below the OECD average in mathematical, problem-solving and scientific knowledge. A higher emphasis on student incentives, teacher quality and a culture of excellence may be necessary to improve these performances.

As the high youth unemployment rate testifies, Poland’s education system has suffered from a lack of synchronization with the labor market. Vocational training is poorly developed. Tertiary enrollment has increased substantially since 1989, but academic qualifications often lack practical relevance or are not cherished by employers. The Tusk government has introduced some reforms: it lowered the compulsory school age from seven to six years of age, increased the salaries of teachers and launched a program delivering modern sports fields for the youth in every town and the laptop-for-every-pupil-program. In tandem with its attempts at strengthening R&D, it has sought to increase quality control in higher education.

Low skill levels and a relatively low proportion of students staying in education after the age of 16 were among the core problems facing education policy in the United Kingdom for many years, and fixing these was among the Labour government’s primary avowed goals upon taking the reins of government in 1997 (“education, education, education”). While there is no doubt that the United Kingdom has excellent schools (both for boarding and day students) in the private sector, many of which attract pupils from wealthy parents abroad, the problem was diagnosed to lie mainly in the public sector, and particularly in economically deprived inner-city areas and secondary schools. A number of policy initiatives (such as “city academies”) have been implemented over the last decade, but their results have been ambiguous. The underlying problem of societal inequality cannot be fundamentally addressed by education policy alone, especially since middle-class parents are eager to remain in control of their children’s schooling.

After a decade of policy initiatives, the OECD Economic Policy Report 2007 still points out that a high proportion of the population in England has low skill levels, and that many students leave school before the completion of upper-secondary education without specific competence in a professional field. Some specific problems recently identified include severe underperformance by boys of Afro-Caribbean ethnic origin, and to a lesser extent, by children of Pakistani origin. Although school performance as measured by the proportion of pupils attaining the highest exam grades at ages 16 and 18 has improved, there have been allegations that exams are simply being graded more generously. Disparity in school performance is an issue that continues to justify criticism of education policy and has recently sparked debate as to whether the private sector and parents should have a greater say in running schools, rather than allowing local authorities to remain solely in charge.

In higher education, the introduction of university fees has met with protests by students, but so far there is little indication that it has endangered the goal of increasing the proportion of each age cohort to attend tertiary education to 50%. The steady rise in this proportion over the last decade has been noteworthy. The improved level of funding for the university sector and recognition of the county’s high standards has also attracted many students from abroad, turning higher education into a valuable source of income for the British economy.

The highly centralized allocation of higher education funding to institutions such as the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) also means that cuts in funding can be decreed relatively easily in the present economic crisis. Massive cuts of about 5% annually over four years have been announced, forcing universities in the UK to implement drastic budget measures. This may lead to a slight fall in availability of student places, although the government is pushing hard to prevent any reduction, demanding instead that universities improve productivity. At a time when a comparatively high number of young people are unable to obtain jobs because of the recession, this is a potential cause for concern. Cuts may also undermine the competitive position of the United Kingdom on the international market for higher education.

The Austrian educational system suffers from structural weaknesses known for a long time and criticized by many experts and international bodies (like the OECD). But the structural features responsible for an underperforming educational system have not changed.
The first structural deficit in the Austrian education system is the tracking of children as of the fourth grade, or when they are 10 years of age. At this point, some children are sent to the Gymnasium, an academic-track secondary school that prepares them for university studies, whereas others continue in the Hauptschule, a more general studies secondary school from where they can later (grade 8) transfer up to the Gymnasium and continue on to a university. However, most Hauptschule students do not move on to Gymnasium or to university studies. Empirical studies have demonstrated that this dual system prevents talented children with disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds from developing their full potential.
The university system, legally bound to offer entry to all students with a degree from a Gymnasium, is still defined by its social elitism – more so than is the case in other European universities. Students in Austria with a disadvantaged socioeconomic background are less likely to attend university than their contemporaries in other European countries.
For more than a decade, Austrian universities have competed with polytechnics (Fachhochschulen), which attract an increasing number of students. Both universities and polytechnics are part of the European “Bologna process,” established to create a common European university system.

During the years of the “Celtic Tiger” boom, Irish politicians often invoked the strong educational system and high levels of attainment as key contributing factors. As the boom turned into bust, unemployment levels soared and the inflow of foreign investment stalled, confidence in the merits of the educational system faltered.
There is now greater awareness of the problem represented by the significant proportion of each cohort that leaves or drops out of the educational system with few or no formal qualifications and low attainment on most academic indicators. This problem was exacerbated during the employment boom, when job opportunities were plentiful even for those with relatively low skills. Now many of those who grasped at early employment opportunities have lost their jobs, and have few qualifications to help them obtain new employment. Moreover, the efficacy of FÁS, the main training agency, is in doubt.
A lively debate developed early in 2010 about the quality of degrees and certificates awarded by Irish secondary and tertiary educational institutions. Significant “grade inflation” has been documented. Some leading industrialists, including the former CEO of Intel, a company that employs several thousand graduates in Ireland, have expressed disquiet about a possible decline in Irish academic standards, while admitting that this is a worldwide phenomenon. Two separate reports commissioned by the minister for education and published in March 2010 confirmed that there was a problem in this area.
The equitableness of public resource allocations for education is also widely questioned. As in most countries, the resources per pupil or student increase steadily the higher up the educational scale one goes, but access becomes narrower in social terms. There is also disquiet at the fact that the secondary educational system is two-tier. A minority of private, fee-based schools are much more socially exclusive, and achieve higher academic results, than the majority of non-fee schools. Yet both groups receive roughly the same levels of state support, with the result that public funds exacerbate inequalities in educational provision. Similarly, universities and colleges do not charge fees, regardless of the family circumstances of the students. This use of public money in such an untargeted manner is perceived as perpetuating social inequality in educational attainment.

The Italian education system, which is predominantly a national state system with some participation by local authorities, alongside a limited private sector, is in principle open to everybody without discrimination. Students pay limited fees only at the university level. In practice, however, access is seriously limited at the upper secondary and tertiary level by the limited amount of resources devoted to scholarships or similar support mechanisms for financially needy students. As might be expected, the share of individuals who do not complete their studies is very high. The share of education expenditure devoted to the salaries of teachers, professors and technical staff, the number of which is often unnecessarily high, is too large. Selection of school and university personnel is still not sufficiently meritocratic. Although there are significant areas of high-quality education at both the secondary and tertiary levels, the system as a whole does not ensure satisfactory standards of quality.
The current government has produced a reform of the secondary level, which was largely guided by the need to reduce expenditure for personnel. However, it also had the aim of strengthening discipline and the authority of school principals, and supports the development of technical education. A reform of the university system is also under way.

Portugal’s education policy failures are more salient in some dimensions than others, with median quality and universal access as the most obvious weaknesses. Access to educational resources remains low and unequal. The government has sought since 2005 to combat this by encouraging more lifelong learning, vocational training and adult education opportunities, notably through its New Opportunities Initiative, launched in late 2005. This is a laudable initiative. However, there remain questions over its implementation, and opposition parties both on the right and the left have particularly criticized a perceived lack of quality in the training provided.
The most relevant measure implemented during the period under review was the government’s extension of the compulsory education period until the end of secondary school (12th grade), a policy approved in August 2009. Previously, students were obliged to remain in school only until ninth grade. This measure will generate important gains in terms of secondary school attainment, a field in which Portugal lags behind its EU peers. However, it has yet to be fully implemented, and questions remain as to how this will take place.

Although Spain remains below the EU average, expenditure on education grew in 2009 to reach 4.95% of GDP. Further increases have also been approved in the general state budget for 2010. Yet, additional spending will be irrelevant if it is not accompanied by improved spending efficiency and does not translate into better educational performance. In that regard, the last Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) report does not indicate successful results; quite the opposite, Spanish schoolchildren occupy the 35th place in reading comprehension, 32nd in mathematics and 31st in sciences in a comparison of 56 countries.

Moreover, school attainment has worsened dramatically, as shown by a compulsory secondary education dropout rate that is now twice the EU average (31% versus 15%). This poses a fundamental challenge for equality, since low attainment strongly correlates to socioeconomic background, and is more frequent among children of immigrant families. Interregional inequalities have also risen both with respect to academic performance and per capita expenditure. In November 2008, the central and regional governments agreed on a plan aimed at reducing early school dropout (the Plan para la Reducción del Abandono Escolar Prematuro), which was also intended to strengthen links between compulsory education, vocational training and work. It is worrying that vocational training remains very unsuccessful, despite the comparatively high wages in many jobs requiring skills acquired through such training. In March 2010, the School 2.0 program was approved, with the goal of making new technologies a fundamental aspect of education, by developing computing infrastructure in conventional classrooms and providing all schoolchildren with a laptop.
The outlook for higher education is little better. Some privately run business schools are considered to be world class, but no Spanish university, either public or private, is ranked among the world’s top 150. In general, universities are still academically driven and fail to respond effectively to emerging labor market demands. This combines with the large number of universities and campuses distributed throughout the country, which offer almost identical degrees. A process of specialization is urgently needed to make the university system sustainable and to enhance its quality. In this context it is worth noting the University Strategy 2015, an initiative shared by the state and regional governments and universities aimed at modernizing the country’s higher education system, promoting excellence in research and training, and improving the system’s international reputation. One of the main elements of the strategy is the Campus of International Excellence program.

Chile’s school and educational attainment levels are very mixed, and are generally much lower than the OECD average. Pre-primary education coverage is still low, but rising. Primary and secondary education coverage is high, reaching nearly 100% of current age cohorts. Tertiary education coverage is moderate but increasing. The government has not achieved its aim of closing the educational gap that exists between the private and public educational systems. The intended educational reform completely failed due to ideological differences between the government’s coalition and the opposition. Reform failures in this area can also be attributed to teachers’ boards’ extreme opposition to private education institutions. High-quality education is accessible only to those who can pay for it themselves.

Aside from the top university programs, Chile’s educational system fails in terms of educating and training people to acquire the knowledge and skills required for a quantum leap in development and growth. This hampers labor productivity growth and efforts to diminish poverty rates. The weak performance results from failures in past and current education policies, and a strong teachers’ lobby that has effectively opposed necessary reforms to school curriculum, school management and attempts to link teacher pay to teaching productivity. In addition, well-intended but perverse social policies that provide substantial childbearing incentives to young, poor and single mothers create substantial disincentives for education in this population.

The education system has continued to drift. The marked local and social disparities in primary and secondary education, caused by the local financing of schools, have further increased. Despite the large unemployment among unskilled young people as well as the “over-production” of academics, vocational training has further eroded. Universities have suffered from a lack of resources because funds have not kept pace with the number of students. Neither the Gyurcsány nor the Bajnai government dared to tackle these issues. After the lost referendum in March 2008, the former retreated from its original plans to improve the financial situation of universities by introducing tuition fees.

Luxembourg is a multilingual society and to succeed in its educational system students must master the three official languages (Luxembourgish, German and French) as well as English in high school. Intensive language teaching leaves little time for other subjects. Forty percent of students are of foreign origin and have difficulties coping with the linguistic requirements, especially when they immigrate with their parents after school entrance age.
Luxembourg’s school system is highly selective and especially discriminatory toward students with a migrant background. It is also the most expensive school system within the OECD: a student costs more than two times the OECD average ($209,060 “cumulative expenditure per student over the theoretical duration of primary and secondary studies”). This amount is explained by high teacher salaries, but seems not so extravagant when it is put in the perspective of per capita GNP.
The first PISA study, which ranked Luxembourg at 29 out of 31 countries, came as a shock and after the 2004 elections the new LSAP education minister launched an ambitious reform of school in general and language teaching in particular. Since the coalition was renewed in 2009, the reforms will continue. The government is correct when it declares that it has done more in this regard during the most recent legislative period than any government before it. The government has undertaken reforms of the School Act of 1912, which defines the organization of primary school, as well as vocational training, and a reform of the secondary school system is under way.
To give an idea of the content of the primary school reform and to rebut the charge that the school pays too much attention to abstract knowledge – such as vocabulary and grammar instead of real speech skills – teaching will be determined by a new paradigm: the competency-based skills approach. Students will continue to acquire knowledge, but the school will be committed to making them capable of using this knowledge in new and varied contexts. The outdated rating system based on a 60-point scale will be progressively replaced by new assessment tools fostering documentation of progress made and promoting motivation among the children. Teamwork between teachers and between pupils, as well as attempts to combat failure and exclusion, are other main features of the new approach.
It is too soon to assess the real impact of these reforms. But, as is often the case in Luxembourg, the reforms were poorly planned and carried out hastily. For instance, the pilot projects started over the past few years were not really evaluated and teachers do not seem prepared to change their habits and their mentalities.

There has been considerable evidence of improvement in education policy, but the country is starting from a low base. The overwhelming majority of Mexican children attend primary school at least, and enrollment in secondary education is also expanding. Public spending on education as a proportion of GDP has been rising. There is near-universal literacy. At the other end of the scale, there has also been an expansion in the quality and quantity of university education, which is no longer the province of a small minority. A small minority, albeit a growing one, does study abroad at postgraduate level. There is a private education system that sits side by side with the state system. The quality of private education is generally good, but only a minority can afford it for their own children despite some availability of scholarships. As far as the state school system is concerned, one significant problem is the all-embracing unionization of Mexico’s teachers. Mexico’s teaching union is probably the most powerful syndical organization in Mexico. The effect of this is to make teacher performance rather variable, as there is no effective system of assessment or merit-based promotion. Unionization also means that teachers’ pay absorbs a comparatively high proportion of the education budget – in fact, teachers’ pay has increased quite a lot in recent years on a real basis. However, there is a high student-teacher ratio in Mexican state schools, which seems to translate into poor teaching performance. When international tests on the comparative performance of schoolchildren are carried out, Mexico tends to score rather low. Higher education has improved a lot under the influence of globalization. Good Mexican graduates now fit easily into postgraduate training programs at European or U.S. universities (which was not the case a generation ago), though many of those who study abroad have already had the benefit of some private education within Mexico itself.

Education is one of Greece’s less well-performing policy sectors. While the population today enjoys wider access to secondary and tertiary education than ever before, the content of educational curricula and the structure and management of the public education system do not ensure high quality, efficiency or the equity of education. While in comparative perspective, the overall public expenditure on education is not impressive (4% of GDP in 2005 according to the World Bank), the student-to-teacher ratio in primary schools is a comparatively low 10.3 (students per teacher). In high schools, this ratio is 7.9 (2007 data). In primary schools, the dropout rate is only 1.8% (2006 World Bank data).
However, with respect to test results from the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), Greece ranks among the least well-performing countries. It is also ranked 31st among the 31 OECD countries in terms of continuing education, measured on the basis of the share of the population aged between 25 and 64 years who have participated in nonformal work-related training. And while 60% of Greeks aged between 25 and 64 years have finished high school, other OECD countries have done better, putting Greece at 25th place among the group’s 31 nations. Both the primary and secondary educational levels are victims of traditional patterns, with results such as ethnocentric curricula, an emphasis on humanities instead of the sciences and excess reliance on memorization skills as a method to evaluate pupils.
Greece does better in terms of tertiary education: About 23% of Greeks aged 15 years to 64 years have finished tertiary education. This gives Greece a ranking of 21st among the 31 OECD countries. However, during the reporting period, the trends of instability and unpredictability in the day-to-day functioning of Greek universities, already visible in the previous reporting period, were intensified. The new higher education law (passed under the ND government in March 2007) was implemented in fits and starts. Student unions fought tooth-and-nail battles against the presidential decrees issued in support of the law’s provisions. The university professors’ trade union, which until February 2009 was controlled by SYN and KKE, the two left-wing parties of the Greek parliament, also opposed what it considered implementation of the Bologna Process in the Greek higher education system. However, since February 2009, the union has been in the hands of a center-right and center-left coalition which accepts the need for university reform. In 2009 – 2010, illegal student mobilizations declined .
Opposition to the new law and bureaucratic delays on the part of the Ministry of Education have meant that the new policy for tertiary education, which aims at improving universities’ management, evaluation procedures and autonomy, has not yet had visible effects.
The Greek education system has also failed to respond to labor market requirements. The academic fields and specialties offered at secondary and tertiary education institutions are not compatible with ongoing shifts in the economy and the labor market, leaving increasing numbers of high school and university graduates with few choices other than underemployment or unemployment. Overall, while Greeks today tend have received formal education to an extent broader than ever before, and many Greeks are able to pursue higher level studies abroad, the outcomes of education policy are mediocre in terms of quality.

Education reform was one of the main policy items left from the previous governments. The Fico government amended the School Act in 2008, but refrained from instituting major reforms. It presented a number of well-sounding policy papers on improving education of the Roma, but failed to implement them. The 2010 Patriotism Act introduced a re-nationalization of education. The Fico government did nothing to expand tertiary education, which has been characterized by strong regional disparities and the lowest enrollment rate in the OECD. Public spending on higher education decreased in 2008 and stayed at a relatively low level in 2009.

Turkey’s educational system does not grant equitable access to education, nor does it provide enough well-trained skilled labor. Its contribution to social cohesion is highly questionable.
The primary problems of Turkey’s school system are associated with access to and quality of education. The main challenges are enrollment rates, regional disparities regarding access, insufficient physical infrastructure, outdated curriculum, a need for improvement in teachers’ skills, and the need to align high-quality education materials with curriculum.
In the 2008 – 2009 educational year, 129,400 potential pupils in the 6 to 13-year-old age cohort did not attend school. Approximately 100,000 of these children live in the poor regions of central and southeastern Anatolia. The ratio of boys to girls, who are sent to school almost equally in the first year, deteriorates markedly by the 5th grade. In secondary education, the lack of access to social security benefits for parents runs parallel to a drop in girls’ school attendance of some 50%.
Although the enrollment rate for pre-primary education has risen from 24% to 33.9% in the last three years, it is still quite low. The main factors behind these low rates are late enrollments, dropouts and problems associated with rural areas, especially girls’ access to education. Moreover, regional disparities in access to pre-primary education are evident. In addition, during the 2008 – 2009 academic year, three in five children who were in the primary education age group but out of the education system were girls.
Since pre-primary education helps reduce the inequalities caused by parents’ socioeconomic backgrounds, and improves performance in later educational years, efforts are being made to extend an obligatory pre-primary education program that was initiated in 32 pilot provinces to all provinces in the forthcoming period.
The secondary education enrollment rate is 76.6%, with significant regional disparities. The share of vocational and technical education in total secondary education was only 40.8% during the 2008 – 2009 academic year. More than 45% of pupils at high schools known for excellent education, such as Anatolian High Schools and the High Schools for Sciences, have a well-educated and well-to-do family background, and the educational system is thus reinforcing social differences.
About 10% of the population is illiterate, and just 29% of the population between 25 and 64 years of age has received at least a secondary education. The 2006 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), which studies the quality of education, revealed low achievement levels for half of the country’s students in mathematics and one-third in reading skills. Hence, a significant portion of students’ basic skills are not sufficient. In a comparative framework, we note that Turkey has the lowest PISA scores of any OECD country.