OECD Education Presentation
62
1 1 Education Indicators Programme 2008 edition of Education a Glance Education at a Glance 2008 Key results Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Under embargo until 9 September 2008, 11:00 Paris time
-
Upload
dr-jimmy-schwarzkopf -
Category
Documents
-
view
790 -
download
3
Transcript of OECD Education Presentation
11E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Education at a Glance 2008Key results
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Under embargo until 9 September 2008, 11:00 Paris time
22E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
EAG 2008: Three main findings
r A rising tide in the demand for high-level qualifications 8 million more students in tertiary systems than back in 1995
(share of age cohort moving into university level education rose from 37% to 57%)
Strong labour-market incentives suggest further expansion– Large and often growing earnings and employment differentials
– Growth in skilled jobs
r Current approaches to the financing of higher education under pressure In spite of recent and considerable increases in spending
levels, expenditure in some countries could not keep up with rising demand, particularly in countries finding difficulties mobilising private resources
r Spending patterns can be explained by policy choices Link between spending levels and outcomes tenuous
33O
EC
D E
du
ca
tio
n
Ind
ica
tors
Pro
gra
mm
e2
00
8 e
dit
ion
of
Ed
uca
tio
n a
Gla
nc
e
A rising tide in the demand for high-level qualifications
Changes in qualification levels (the past)
Changes in graduation rates (the present)
Changes in entry rates (best guess for the future)
44E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Isra
el
Net
herl
ands
Nor
way
Denm
ark
Can
ada
Est
onia
Rus
sian
Federa
tion
2
Aus
tral
ia
Icela
nd
Sw
eden
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Hun
gary
Sw
itze
rlan
d
New
Zeal
and
Jap
an
OE
CD
ave
rage
Ger
man
y
Fin
land
EU
19 av
era
ge
Pola
nd
Spa
in
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Fra
nce
Irela
nd
Lux
em
bou
rg
Bel
gium
Kor
ea
Gre
ece
Ital
y
Mexic
o
Chile
1
Tur
key
Port
ugal
Aus
tria
Slo
veni
a
2000's 1990's 1980's 1970's%
A1.3a 1. Year of reference 2004.2. Year of reference 2002.
Growth in university-level qualificationsApproximated by the percentage of the population that has attained tertiary-type A education in the age groups 25-34 years, 35-44 years, 45-54 years and 55-64 years) (2006)
14
28
9
12
4
24
14
21
55E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Science has benefited most from the expansionRatio of 25-to-34-year-olds with ISCED 5A and 30-to-39-year-olds with ISCED 6 levels of education to 55-to-64-
year-olds with ISCED 5A and 6 levels of education, by fields of education (2004)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Port
ugal
Spa
in
Irela
nd
Fra
nce
Mexic
o
Icela
nd
Aus
tral
ia
Belg
ium
Ital
y
OE
CD
ave
rage
Lux
em
bou
rg
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Can
ada
1, 2
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Nor
way
Aus
tria
Fin
land
Neth
erl
ands
Hun
gary
Sw
eden
Denm
ark
Germ
any
Arts and humanities Science Engineering All fieldsRatio
A1.4 1. Year of reference 2001. Only ISCED 5A of educational attainment.2. Average of ratios, not as a whole as in EAG 2007.
Ratios larger than 1 mean that more graduates enter than exit the labour-market
66E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Number of tertiary science graduates per 100 000 employed 25-to-34-year-olds (2006)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000K
orea
Fra
nce1
Aus
tral
ia
Irela
nd
Fin
land
New
Zeal
and
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Pola
nd
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Sw
eden
OE
CD
ave
rage
EU
19 a
vera
ge
Jap
an
Denm
ark
Germ
any
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Ital
y 2
Port
ugal
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Icela
nd
Spa
in
Aus
tria
Belg
ium
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Tur
key
Mexic
o
Nor
way
Neth
erl
ands
Hun
gary
Total Males Females
1. Year of reference 2005.2. Advanced research programmes refer to 2005.
Num
ber
of g
radua
tes
A3.6
77E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70Ice
land
1
Aus
tralia1
New Z
ealand
1
Finland
1
Poland
1
Denm
ark
1
Neth
erland
s1
Nor
way1
Sweden1
Ita
ly
Ire
land
Unite
d K
ingd
om1
Japa
n
OECD a
vera
ge
Isr
ael
Unite
d S
tate
s
EU19 a
vera
ge
Cana
da1,2
Slova
k R
epu
blic1
Port
ugal1
Spa
in
Hun
gary
Switzerland
1
Czech
Repu
blic1
Aus
tria1
Germ
any
1
Slove
nia
Gre
ece
1
Tur
key
2006 2000 1995
1. Net graduation rate is calculated by summing the graduation rates by single year of age in 2006. 2. Year of reference 2005.Countries are ranked in descending order of the graduation rates for tertiary-type A education in 2006.Source: OECD. Table A3.2. See Annex 3 for notes (www.oecd.org/edu/eag2008)
Trends in university-level graduation outputFirst-time graduation rate at the tertiary-type A level
%
A3.2
88E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Tertiary-type A graduation rates by gender in 2006 (first time graduation)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100Ic
ela
nd
Aus
tral
ia
New
Zeal
and
Fin
land
Pola
nd
Denm
ark
Neth
erl
ands
Nor
way
Sw
eden
Ital
y1
Irela
nd1
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Jap
an1
OE
CD
ave
rage
Isra
el
Uni
ted S
tate
s1
EU
9 a
vera
ge
Can
ada2
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Port
ugal
Spa
in1
Hun
gary
1
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Aus
tria
Germ
any
Slo
veni
a
Gre
ece
Tur
key1
M+F Males Females
1. Entry rate for tertiary type A programmes is calculated as gross entry rate in 2006.
%
A3.1
99E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Aus
tralia
New Z
ealand
Unite
d K
ingd
om
Switzerland
Aus
tria
Germ
any
Cana
da1
Denm
ark
Finland
2
Sweden
Unite
d S
tate
s
Japa
n
Est
onia
Nor
way
Slove
nia
Belgium3
Czech
Repu
blic3
Port
ugal3
Hun
gary
3
Ice
land
3
Slova
k R
epu
blic3
Tur
key3
Tertiary-type A programmes, first degree
Tertiary-type A programmes, second degree
Advanced research programmes
1. Year of reference 2005. 2. First degrees programmes include second degrees. 3. Proportion of foreign graduates in tertiary graduate output. These data are not comparable with data in
international graduates and are therefore presented separately.
Contribution of international students to university graduate output
Percentage of tertiary qualifications awarded to international students (2005)
%
A3.4
1010E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Distribution of foreign students by country of destination
Percentage of foreign tertiary students reported to the OECD who are enrolled in each country of destination (2006)
C3.2
United States, 20.0%
United Kingdom, 11.3%
Germany, 8.9%
France, 8.5%Australia, 6.3%
Canada, 5.1%
Japan, 4.4%
Russian Federation,
2.6%
New Zealand, 2.3%
South Africa, 1.8%
Spain, 1.7%
Italy, 1.7%
Belgium,
1.6%
Sweden , 1.4%
Malaysia,
1.4%
Switzerland, 1.3%
Austria, 1.3%
Netherlands, 1.2%
Other OECD
countries, 6.3%
Other partner
countries,
10.7%
1111E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Trends in international education market shares Percentage of all foreign tertiary students enrolled by destination
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Germ
any
Fra
nce
Aus
tral
ia
Can
ada
1
Jap
an
New
Zeal
and
Spa
in
Ital
y
Bel
gium
Sw
eden
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Aus
tria
Net
her
land
s
Kor
ea
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Denm
ark
Tur
key
Port
ugal
Gre
ece
Hun
gary
Nor
way
Irel
and
Pola
nd
Fin
land
Mex
ico
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Lux
embou
rg
Icela
nd
2000 2006
C3.3
Market share (%)
1212E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Note: The data on the mobility of international students presented are not comparable with data on foreignstudents in tertiary education (defined on the basis of citizenship) presented in pre-2006 editions of Education at a Glance . 1. Year of reference 2005.
Percentage of international students enrolled in tertiary education
International students who travelled to a different country for the purpose of tertiary study (2006)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Aus
tralia
New Z
ealand
Unite
d K
ingd
om
Switzerland
Aus
tria
Cana
da 1
Belgium
Ire
land
Czech
Repu
blic
Sweden
Denm
ark
Neth
erland
s
Finland
Unite
d S
tate
s
Japa
n
Hun
gary
Nor
way
Est
onia
Spa
in
Slove
nia
Slova
k R
epu
blic
%
C3.1
1313E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Entry rates into tertiary-type A education
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Aus
tral
ia
Icela
nd
Pola
nd
Fin
land
Sw
eden
New
Zeal
and
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Nor
way
Hun
gary
Rus
sian
Federa
tion
1
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Kor
ea
Denm
ark
Neth
erl
ands
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Isra
el
OE
CD
ave
rage
EU
9 a
vera
ge
Ital
y1
Port
ugal
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Gre
ece
Slo
veni
a
Jap
an
Spa
in
Chile1
Est
onia
Irela
nd
Aus
tria
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Germ
any
Belg
ium
Mexic
o
Tur
key
2006 2000 1995
1. Entry rate for tertiary type A programmes is calculated as gross entry rate in 2006.
%
A2.3
Across OECD countries tertiary systems are now providing for around 8 million more students than back in 1995
1414E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Proportion of students who enter a tertiary programmebut leave without at least a first tertiary degree (2005)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ita
ly 1
Uni
ted S
tate
s 2
New
Zeal
and
Hun
gary
Mex
ico
Est
onia
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Pola
nd
Slo
veni
a
Nor
way
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
1
Port
ugal
Sw
eden
Icel
and
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Sw
itze
rlan
d 1
Aus
tria
1
Net
her
land
s
Aus
tral
ia 1
Fin
land
Can
ada
(Que
bec
)
Germ
any
Rus
sian
Fed
erat
ion
Fra
nce
Bel
gium
(F
l.)
Denm
ark
2
Jap
an
Without tertiary qualifications
OECD average
1. Response rate too low to ensure comparability.2. Only full-time students.
A4.1
%
1515E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Entry rates at tertiary education compared to population leaving without completing tertiary
education (2005)
Belgium
Denmark
Finland
Germany
HungaryIceland
Japan
Mexico
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Slovak Republic
Sweden
United Kingdom
United StatesEstonia
Russian Federation
Slovenia
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Population leaving without tertiary education
Ent
ry r
ate
1616O
EC
D E
du
ca
tio
n
Ind
ica
tors
Pro
gra
mm
e2
00
8 e
dit
ion
of
Ed
uca
tio
n a
Gla
nc
e
So what?
Has the increasing supply of well-educated labour been matched by the creation of high-paying jobs?
Will one day everyone have a university degree but work for the minimum wage?
1717E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Proportion of the population in skilled jobs andproportion with tertiary qualifications (2006)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Net
her
land
s
Aus
tral
ia
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Isra
el
Fin
land
Nor
way
Icela
nd
Lux
embou
rg
Bel
gium
Can
ada
Sw
eden
Denm
ark
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Germ
any
Fra
nce
Slo
veni
a
Ital
y
Irel
and
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Aus
tria
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Hun
gary
Pola
nd
Spa
in
Port
ugal
Tur
key
Skilled jobs (ISCO 1-3) Tertiary attainment (5B, 5A/6)
Note : For the United States, ISCO groupings 3 and 9 are not separated and thus distributed amongremaining ISCO categories. A1.1
In OECD countries, the proportion of skilled jobs in the economy isgenerally larger than the potential supply of tertiary educatedindividuals. For countries in which work-based learning is central to occupational advancement, this difference is large. In a few countries, tertiary attainment matches or marginally exceeds the proportion of skilled jobs, so that further expansion of higher education will to someextent depend on the growth of skilled jobs in the coming years.
1818E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Changes in skilled jobs and tertiary attainmentbetween 1998-2006
A1.6
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Ita
ly1
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Lux
embou
rg
Aus
tria
Slova
k R
epu
blic
Neth
erland
s
Slove
nia
Germ
any
2
Switze
rland
Hun
gary
Aus
tralia
Ice
land
Poland
Fra
nce
Tur
key
Sweden
Nor
way
Belgium
Port
ugal
Unite
d K
ingd
om1
Finland
Denm
ark
Ire
land
Spa
in
Isr
ael
Unite
d S
tate
s3
Cana
da
Change in tertiary attainment (ISCED 5/6) in the 25-to-64-year-old population between 1998 and 2006
Change in skilled occupations (ISCO 1-3) in the 25-to-64-year-old population between 1998 and 2006
Difference between skilled jobs and tertiary educated in the 25-to-64-year-old population (2006)
1. Change in survey methodology between 1998 and 2006 influences the comparability. 2. The year of reference is 1999, not 1998.3. ISCO groupings 3 and 9 are not separated and thus distributed among remaining ISCO categories.
For countries with large differences in skilled jobs and tertiaryattainment levels, the fundamental question is whether higher growth in skilled occupations could be achieved if more individuals with tertiaryeducation were available to the labour market or whether labour marketexperience and adult learning is sufficient to provide the necessaryskills.
1919E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
Kor
ea
(2)
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Hun
gary
Irela
nd (
3)
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Can
ada
(4)
Port
ugal
(4
)
Pola
nd
Germ
any
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Isra
el
Aus
tria
Fin
land
(3
)
Tur
key
(4)
Fra
nce
Aus
tral
ia (
4)
Spa
in (
3)
Belg
ium
(4
)
Lux
em
bou
rg (
1)
New
Zeal
and
Ital
y (3
)
Nor
way
(4
)
Sw
eden
(4)
Denm
ark
(4)
Below upper secondary education Tertiary-type B education Tertiary-type A and advanced research programmes
Females
% o
f in
dex
A9.2a
Relative earnings from employment for femalesBy level of educational attainment and gender for 25-to-64-year-olds (upper
secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education=100) (latest available year)
1. Year of reference 2002. 3. Year of reference 2004.2. Year of reference 2003. 4. Year of reference 2005.
2020E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
Hun
gary
Pola
nd
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Irela
nd (
3)
Ital
y (3
)
Isra
el
Port
ugal
(4
)
Aus
tria
Fin
land
(3
)
Fra
nce
Germ
any
Lux
em
bou
rg (
1)
Can
ada
(4)
Tur
key
(4)
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Belg
ium
(4
)
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Sw
eden
(4)
Spa
in (
3)
Aus
tral
ia (
4)
Den
mar
k (4
)
Kor
ea
(2)
Nor
way
(4
)
New
Zeal
and
Below upper secondary education Tertiary-type B education Tertiary-type A and advanced research programmes
Males
% o
f in
dex
A9.2b
Relative earnings from employment for males By level of educational attainment and gender for 25-to-64-year-olds
(upper secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education= 100) latest available year
1. Year of reference 2002. 3. Year of reference 2004.2. Year of reference 2003. 4. Year of reference 2005.
Males with a degree from a tertiary-type A or advancedresearch programme have a substantial earnings premium inthe Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland that is close to100%.
2121E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Private internal rates of return for an individual obtaining a university-level degree, ISCED 5/6 (2004)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F
CZE POR POL HUN UKM BEL USA FIN CHE IRL CAN KOR NZL FRA DEU NOR ESP SWE DEN
A10.1b
2222E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50
Denmark 4.4%
Sweden 5.1%
Norway 7.4%
Spain 7.6%
Germany 8%
France 8.4%
New Zealand 8.6%
Korea 9%
Canada 9.4%
Ireland 10.2%
Switzerland 10.3%
Finland 10.7%
United States 11%
Belgium 11.3%
United Kingdom 14.3%
Hungary 19.8%
Poland 22.8%
Portugal 23.9%
Czech Republic 29.1%
Direct cost Foregone earnings Gross earnings benefits
Unemployment effect Income tax effect Social contribution effect
Composite Impact
%
Cost components Benefits components
Components of the internal rate of return for a maleobtaining tertiary education, ISCED 5/6 (2004)
A10.2
.
The data show no relationship between tuition levels and the rate of return
2323E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
(600) (400) (200) 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400
Denmark 4.4%Sweden 5.1%Norway 7.4%
Spain 7.6%Germany 8%France 8.4%
New Zealand 8.6%Korea 9%
Canada 9.4%Ireland 10.2%
Switzerland 10.3%Finland 10.7%
United States 11%Belgium 11.3%
United Kingdom 14.3%Hungary 19.8%
Poland 22.8%Portugal 23.9%
Czech Republic 29.1%
Thousands
Direct cost Foregone earnings Gross earnings benefits Unemployment effect
Income tax effect Social contribution effect Composite Impact
Cost components Benefits components
Note: Those amounts (in USD equivalents) are not discounted by the IRR and then differ from the amounts uponwhich Chart A10.2 is based. Chart A10.2 gives a more accurate picture of the components weight.
Cumulated streams of assumed costs and benefits The IRR is the discount rate at which the Net Present Value=0. Given a stream of
assumed costs and benefits over 25-to-64-years-old, the IRR represents the rate of return on investment expressed as an interest rate.
2424E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
The effects of tertiary expansion: A high calibre workforce or the overqualified
crowding out the lesser qualified? Lower secondary unemployment rate as a ratio of upper secondary unemployment rate
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1995 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2004
Top group Middle group Bottom group
A1.4 2007
“Top group”The nine countries that expanded tertiary education fastest in the 1990s (5.9% on average)
“Middle group”The eight countries with modest increases in tertiary education (2.4% on average) (UK)
“Bottom group”The nine countries with no or very modest increases in tertiary education (0.1% on average)
In those countries that did not expand tertiary education (the bottomgroup), failure to complete upper secondary education is now associatedwith an 80% greater probability of being unemployed, compared to lessthan 50% in the top group.
2525E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Percentage
points
A8.3
Difference between unemployment rates of females and males, by level of
education attainment (2006)
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
Jap
an
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Germ
any
Tur
key
Kor
ea
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Aus
tria
Aus
tral
ia
Hun
gary
Nor
way
Irel
and
Mex
ico
New
Zeal
and
Slo
veni
a
Can
ada
Est
onia
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Denm
ark
Sw
eden
Net
her
land
s
Fra
nce
Fin
land
Isra
el
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Port
ugal
Bel
gium
Lux
embou
rg
Pola
nd
Ital
y
Gre
ece
Spa
in
Below upper secondary education
Upper secondary and post-secondary non tertiary education
Tertiary education
Unemployment rate higher for females
Unemployment rate higher for males
Gender differences in unemployment are much smaller for those with higher qualifications
2626E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Expected years in education and not in education for 15-to-29-year-olds (2006)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Ice
land
Denm
ark
Slove
nia
Finland
Neth
erland
s
Poland
Germ
any
Sweden
Fra
nce
Est
onia
Lux
embou
rg
Hun
gary
Nor
way
Aus
tralia
Switzerland
Unite
d S
tate
s
Cana
da
Belgium
Aus
tria
Ita
ly
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Gre
ece
Slova
k R
epu
blic
Isr
ael
Unite
d K
ingd
om
Port
ugal
New Z
ealand
Japa
n 1
Spa
in
Ire
land
Mexico
2
Tur
key 3
OECD28 a
vera
ge
EU19 a
vera
ge
Not in education, not in the labour force Not in education, unemployed
Not in education, employed In education, employed (including work/study)
In education, not employed
1. Data refer to 15-to-24-year-olds.2. Year of reference 2004.3. Year of reference 2005.
C4.2
Years
2727O
EC
D E
du
ca
tio
n
Ind
ica
tors
Pro
gra
mm
e2
00
8 e
dit
ion
of
Ed
uca
tio
n a
Gla
nc
e
Current approaches to the financing of higher education under pressure
*
2828E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Expenditure on educational institutions as a percentage of GDP for all levels of education
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Isr
ael
Ice
land
Denm
ark
Kor
ea
Unite
d S
tate
s
New Z
ealand
Mexico
Sweden
Unite
d K
ingd
om
Cana
da1
Slove
nia
Switzerland
2
Belgium
Fra
nce
Finland
Poland
Aus
tralia
Port
ugal
Nor
way2
Chile3
Hun
gary
Aus
tria
Germ
any
Neth
erland
s
Est
onia
Japa
n
Ita
ly
Czech
Repu
blic
Spa
in
Ire
land
Slova
k R
epu
blic
Bra
zil2
Gre
ece
Rus
sian …
% of GDP 2005 2000 OECD total
1. Year of reference 2004 instead of 2005.2. Expenditure from public sources only (for Switzerland, in tertiary education only).3. Year of reference 2006 instead of 2005.B2.1
2929E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Who pays for high-level qualificationsExpenditure on tertiary educational institutions
as a percentage of GDP (2005)
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
Fin
land
Can
ada
Denm
ark
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Gre
ece
Nor
way
Aus
tria
Belg
ium
Pola
nd
Fra
nce
Icela
nd
Irela
nd
Neth
erl
ands
Germ
any
Port
ugal
Mexic
o
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
New
Zeal
and
Hun
gary
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Aus
tral
ia
Spa
in
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Ital
y
Kor
ea
Jap
an
Uni
ted S
tate
s
OE
CD
ave
rage
EU
19 a
vera
ge
% of GDP Private Public
B2.4
3030E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Unite
d S
tate
s
Cana
da1, 2
Kor
ea
Isr
ael
Finland
Sweden
Aus
tralia
Poland
New Z
ealand
Gre
ece
Switzerland
Port
ugal
Unite
d K
ingd
om
Fra
nce
Mexico
Slove
nia
Nor
way
Aus
tria
Neth
erland
s
Belgium
Ire
land
Est
onia
Spa
in
Hun
gary
Germ
any
Czech
Repu
blic
Ita
ly
Slova
k R
epu
blic1
Bra
zil1
Chile 3
, 4
Denm
ark
1, 3
Japa
n1, 3
Ice
land
1, 3
Rus
sian
Federa
tion
3
Total expenditure on educational institutions
Research & development (R&D)
Ancillary services (transport, meals, housing provided by institutions)
Educational core services
B6.2
Expenditure on educational core services, R&D and ancillary services in tertiary educational institutions as a
percentage of GDP (2005)% of GDP
1. Some levels of education are included with others. 2. Total expenditure at tertiary level including R&D expenditure3. Year of reference 2005.4. Total expenditure at tertiary level excluding R&D expenditure
3131E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
708090
100110120130140150160170180190200210220
Chile
Bra
zil1,2
,3
Hun
gary
2
Ire
land
Isr
ael
Neth
erland
s
Sweden
Belgium
Est
onia 1
Germ
any
Ita
ly 2
Fra
nce
Nor
way1
Unite
d S
tate
s
Switzerland
1,2
Japa
n3
Slova
k R
epu
blic3
Finland
Czech
Repu
blic
Aus
tralia
Mexico
Denm
ark
3
Ice
land
Kor
ea
Spa
in
Unite
d K
ingd
om
Port
ugal 2
Aus
tria
Poland
2
Gre
ece
Change in expenditure
Change in the number of students (in full-time equivalents)
Change in expenditure per student
Index o
f ch
ange
(2
00
0=1
00
)
1. Public institutions only.2. Public expenditure only.3. Some levels of education are included with others.
236
Changes in student numbers and expenditure for tertiary education
Index of change between 2000 and 2005 (2000=100, 2005 constant prices)
B1.7b
3232E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Share of private expenditure on tertiary institutions
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Chile1
Kor
ea
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Jap
an2
Aus
tral
ia
Can
ada2
, 3
Isra
el
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Mexic
o
Germ
any
Slo
vak
Repu
blic2
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Spa
in
Ital
y
Pola
nd
Fra
nce
Icela
nd2
Hun
gary
Neth
erl
ands
Aus
tria
Denm
ark2
Port
ugal
Irela
nd
Gre
ece
Belg
ium
Sw
eden
Fin
land
2000 2005
1. Year of reference 2006 instead of 2005.2. Some levels of education are included with others. 3. Year of reference 2004 instead of 2005.
%
B3.3c
In 2005, the share of public funding at the tertiary levelrepresented 73% on average in OECD countries. On averageamong the 18 OECD countries for which trend data areavailable, the share of public funding in tertiary institutionsdecreased slightly from 79% in 1995 to 77% in 2000 and to73% in 2005.
3333E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Average annual tuition feescharged by tertiary-type A public institutions for full-time national
students, in US Dollars converted using PPPs (school year 2004/2005)
Italy (56%)Austria (37%), Spain (43%),
Czech Republic (41%), Denmark (57%), Finland (73%), Ireland (45%), Iceland (74%), Norway (76%),
Poland (76%), Sweden (76%)
Canada (m)
Israel1 (55%)New Zealand (79%)
Australia (82%), Japan (44%), Korea (51%)
United Kingdom1 (51%)Netherlands1 (59%)
United States (64%)Chile (48%)
Belgium (Fr. and Fl.) (33%)Turkey (27%), France (m)
0
500
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
USD
B5.1
1. Public institutions do not exist at this level of education and most of the students are enrolled in government dependent institutions.
This chart does not take intoaccount grants, subsidies or loans that partially or fullyoffset the students’ tuition
fees
In eight OECD countries, public institutions charge nofees, but in one-third of countries public institutionscharge annual tuition fees for national students in excessof USD 1 500. Among the EU19 countries, only theNetherlands and the United Kingdom have annual tuitionfees that represent more than USED 1000 per full-timestudent; these relate to government-dependentinstitutions.
3434E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Public subsidies for education in tertiary education (2005)
Public subsidies for education to households and other private entities as a percentage of total public expenditure on education, by type of subsidy
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Denm
ark
Slo
veni
a
Aus
tria
Chile
Fin
land
Ita
ly
Hun
gary
Est
onia
Belg
ium
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Ire
land
Aus
tral
ia
Germ
any
Can
ada
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Neth
erl
ands
New
Zeal
and
Nor
way
Sw
eden
Isr
ael
Port
ugal
Spa
in
Fra
nce
Bra
zil
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Mexic
o
Kor
ea
Pola
nd
Gre
ece
Jap
an
Ice
land
% o
f to
tal pu
blic
expe
nditur
e o
n educ
ation
Transfers and payments to other private entities Student loans
Scholarships/ other grants to households OECD average
B5.2
OECD countries spend, on average, 18% of their publicbudgets for tertiary education on subsidies to householdsand other private entities. In Australia, Denmark, theNetherlands, New Zealand, Norway and Sweden and thepartner country Chile, public subsidies account for 27% ormore of public spending on tertiary education. Only Greece,Korea and Poland spend less than 5% of total public spendingon tertiary education on subsidies.
3535E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Australia
AustriaBelgium (Fr.)
DenmarkFinland and Iceland
France2
Italy
Japan
Netherlands1
Spain Sweden and Norway
Turkey
United States
Czech RepublicPoland
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 25 50 75 100
Relationships between average tuition fees and proportion of students who benefit from public loans
and/or scholarships/grantsTertiary-type A, public institutions, academic year 2004/05, national full-time students
Ave
rage
tuition
fees
charg
ed
by
public
inst
itut
ions
in
USD
% of students that benefit from public loans and/or sholarships/grantsB5.3
Group 3:Extensive and broadly
uniform cost sharing across students, student support systems somewhat less
developed.
Group 2:Potentially high financial barriers for entry to
tertiary-type A education, but also large public subsidies to students.
Group 4:Relatively low financial barriers to entry to tertiary education and relatively low subsidies
Group 1:No (or low) financial barriers for tertiary studies due to tuition
fees and still a high level of student aid.
3636O
EC
D E
du
ca
tio
n
Ind
ica
tors
Pro
gra
mm
e2
00
8 e
dit
ion
of
Ed
uca
tio
n a
Gla
nc
e
School education
3737E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Growth in baseline qualificationsApproximated by percentage of persons with upper secondary or equivalent qualfications
in the age groups 55-64, 45-55, 45-44 und 25-34 years
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100Unite
d S
tate
s
Czech
Repu
blic
Est
onia
Switzerland
Germ
any
Cana
da
Denm
ark
Nor
way
Sweden
Rus
sian
Federa
tion
2
Aus
tria
Slove
nia
Slova
k R
epu
blic
Isr
ael
Hun
gary
Finland
Unite
d K
ingd
om
Neth
erland
s
New Z
ealand
EU19 ave
rage
OECD a
vera
ge
Lux
embou
rg
Aus
tralia
Fra
nce
Ice
land
Belgium
Poland
Ire
land
Kor
ea
Gre
ece
Ita
ly
Chile 1
Spa
in
Mexico
Tur
key
Port
ugal
Bra
zil 1
2000's 1990's 1980's 1970's
%
A1.1a
1. Year of reference 20042. Year of reference 2002.
13
21
1
10
1
23
3838E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100G
erm
any
Gre
ece
Slo
veni
a
Fin
land
Kor
ea
Jap
an
Nor
way
Icela
nd
Isra
el
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Irela
nd
Denm
ark
EU
19 a
vera
ge
Ital
y
OE
CD
ave
rage
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Can
ada1
Pola
nd
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Sw
eden
Est
onia
New
Zeal
and
Spa
in
Lux
em
bou
rg
Chile
Tur
key
Mexic
o
2006 1995
1. Year of reference 2005.
Upper secondary graduation ratesPercentage of graduates to the population at the typical age of graduation (unduplicated count)
%
A2.1
3939E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Access to tertiary-type A education for upper secondary graduates (2006)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Fin
land
Isra
el
Irela
nd
Pola
nd
Ital
y1
Est
onia
Sw
eden
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Chile1
Hun
gary
Jap
an
Aus
tral
ia
Kor
ea
Gre
ece
Icela
nd
EU
19 a
vera
ge
Belg
ium
Neth
erl
ands
OE
CD
ave
rage
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Port
ugal
Nor
way
Rus
sian
Feder
atio
n1
Den
mar
k
Tur
key
Spa
in
Aus
tria
2
Germ
any
Mexic
o
Slo
veni
a
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Graduation rates from programmes designed to prepare students for tertiary-type A education
Entry rates into tertiary-type A education %
A2.21. Entry-rate for tertiary-type A programmes is calculated as gross entry rate. 2. Includes ISCED 4A programmes ( Berufsbildende Höhere Schulen).
4040E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Cumulative expenditure on educational institutions per student over primary and secondary studies (2005) Annual expenditure on educational institutions per student multiplied by the
theoretical duration of studies, in equivalent USD converted using PPPs
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
Lux
embou
rg1
Switzerland
1
Nor
way
Ice
land
Unite
d S
tate
s
Denm
ark
Aus
tria
Ita
ly 1
Sweden
Aus
tralia
Fra
nce
Slove
nia1
Germ
any
Japa
n
Ire
land
Belgium
Unite
d K
ingd
om
Gre
ece
Finland
Spa
in
Neth
erland
s
New Z
ealand
Kor
ea
Port
ugal1
Isr
ael
Czech
Repu
blic
Hun
gary
1
Est
onia1
Poland
1
Slova
k R
epu
blic
Mexico
Chile
Bra
zil1
Primary education Lower secondary
Upper secondary education All secondary education
In e
quiv
alent
US
D u
sing
PPP
s
OECD average (primary and secondary)
B1.41. Public institutions only.
4141E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
Belgium
Chile
Germ
any
Fra
nce
Aus
tria
Ita
ly 2
Unite
d S
tate
s
Isr
ael
Nor
way1
Switzerland
1,2
Aus
tralia
Denm
ark
3
Japa
n3
Sweden
Port
ugal 2
Spa
in
Cana
da 3
Neth
erland
s
Finland
Mexico
Poland
2
Unite
d K
ingd
om
Gre
ece
3
Ice
land
Bra
zil1,2
,3
Czech
Repu
blic
Slova
k R
epu
blic3
Ire
land
Kor
ea
Est
onia 1
Hun
gary
2
Change in expenditure
Change in the number of students (in full-time equivalents)
Change in expenditure per student
Changes in student numbers and expenditurePrimary, secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education
Index of change between 2000 and 2005 (2000=100, 2005 constant prices)In
dex o
f ch
ange
(2
00
0=1
00
)
B1.7a 1. Public expenditure only.2. Public institutions only.3. Some levels of education are included with others.
4242E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
Port
ugal
Spa
in
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Tur
key
Belg
ium
Kor
ea
Lux
em
bou
rg
Germ
any
Gre
ece
Jap
an
Aus
tral
ia
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
New
Zeal
and
Fra
nce
Neth
erl
ands
Den
mar
k
Ital
y
Aus
tria
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Hun
gary
Nor
way
Icela
nd
Irela
nd
Mexic
o
Fin
land
Sw
eden
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Pola
nd
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Salary as % of GDP/capita Instruction time 1/teaching time 1/class size
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
Port
ugal
Spa
in
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Tur
key
Belg
ium
Kor
ea
Lux
em
bou
rg
Germ
any
Gre
ece
Jap
an
Aus
tral
ia
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
New
Zeal
and
Fra
nce
Neth
erl
ands
Den
mar
k
Ital
y
Aus
tria
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Hun
gary
Nor
way
Icela
nd
Irela
nd
Mexic
o
Fin
land
Sw
eden
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Pola
nd
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Difference with OECD average
Contribution of various factors to upper secondary teacher compensation costs
per student as a percentage of GDP per capita (2004)
Percentage points
B7.1
Teacher compensation cost per student varies from 3.9% of GDP per capita inthe Slovak Republic (less than half the OECD average rate of 10.9%) to over fivetimes that rate in Portugal (20.9%, nearly twice the OECD average). Four factorsinfluence these trends – salary level, instruction time for students, teaching timeof teachers and average class size – so that a given level of compensation costper student can result from quite different combinations of the four factors.
4343E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Expenditure on educational institutions per student at various levels of education for all services relative to
primary education (2005)Primary education = 100
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Bra
zil 1
Chile
Mexic
o
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Sw
itze
rlan
d 1
Germ
any
Aus
tral
ia
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Isra
el
Neth
erl
ands
Fin
land
New
Zeal
and
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Sw
eden
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
2
Fra
nce
Spa
in
Jap
an
Irela
nd
Port
ugal
1
Belg
ium
Aus
tria
Denm
ark
Nor
way
Pola
nd 1
Kor
ea
Hun
gary
1
Gre
ece
1, 2
Ital
y 1
Est
onia
Icela
nd
Lux
em
bou
rg 1
, 2
Pre-primary education Secondary education Tertiary education
Note: A ratio of 300 for tertiary education means that the expenditure on educational institutions per tertiary student is threetimes the expenditure on educational institutions per primary student. A ratio of 50 for pre-primary education means thatexpenditure on educational institutions per pre-primary student is half the expenditure on educational institutions per primarystudent.1. Public institutions only.2. Some levels of education are included with others..
Index
B1.3
4444E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Total number of intended instruction hours in public institutions between the ages of 7 and 14 (2006)
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000
ChileItaly
NetherlandsAustralia
New ZealandBelgium (Fr.)
FranceMexicoIsrael
IrelandEnglandGreece
PortugalBelgium (Fl.)
TurkeySpain
AustriaLuxembourg
IcelandDenmark
JapanCzech Republic
HungaryGermany
KoreaSwedenNorwaySloveniaFinlandEstonia
Ages 7-8 Ages 9-11 Ages 12-14
Total number of intended instruction time in hours
D1.1
Students in OECD countries are expected to receive, onaverage, 6 907 hours of instruction between the ages of 7and 14, of which 1 591 between ages 7 and 8, 2 518 betweenages 9 and 11, and 2 798 between ages 12 and 14. The largemajority of intended hours of instruction are compulsory.
4545E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Kor
ea
Chile
Jap
an
Isra
el
Tur
key
Bra
zil
Irela
nd1
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Aus
tral
ia
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Fra
nce
Neth
erl
ands
Germ
any2
Spa
in
Belg
ium
(F
r.)
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Pola
nd
Hun
gary
Mexic
o
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Aus
tria
Denm
ark
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Est
onia
Port
ugal
Gre
ece
Ital
y
Icela
nd
Slo
veni
a
Lux
em
bou
rg
Rus
sian
Federa
tion
Number of students
per class 2006 2000
Average class size in primary education
D2.11. Public institutions only2. Years of reference 2001 and 2006.
4646E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Average class size (2006)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Kor
ea
Jap
an
Isra
el
Bra
zil
Chile
Mex
ico
Germ
any
Pola
nd
Spa
in
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Fra
nce
Aus
tral
ia
Aus
tria
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Est
onia
Slo
vak
Repu
blic
Port
ugal
Uni
ted K
ingd
om
Gre
ece
Hun
gary
Ital
y
Slo
veni
a
Denm
ark
Irel
and1
Lux
embou
rg
Icel
and
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Rus
sian
Fed
erat
ion
Tur
key
Primary education Lower secondary education
11. Public institutions only
Number of students
per classroom
D2.2
4747E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Teachers’ salaries (minimum, after 15 years experience, and maximum) in lower secondary education (2006)
Annual statutory teachers’ salaries in public institutions in lower secondary education, in equivalent USD converted using PPPs, and the ratio of salary of 15 years of experience to GDP per capita
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
Lux
em
bou
rg
Sw
itze
rlan
d
Kor
ea
Germ
any
Jap
an
Ire
land
Sco
tlan
d
Neth
erl
ands
Aus
tral
ia
Spa
in
Eng
land
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Belg
ium
(F
l.)
Denm
ark
Aus
tria
Belg
ium
(F
r.)
Fin
land
New
Zeal
and
Nor
way
Fra
nce
Port
ugal
Gre
ece
Ita
ly
Sw
eden
Slo
veni
a
Icela
nd
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Mexic
o
Isra
el
Hun
gary
Chile
Est
onia
Salary after 15 years of experience/ minimum training
Starting salary/ minimum training
Salary at the top of scale/ minimum trainingEquivalent USD converted using PPPs
D3.2
The annual statutory salaries of lower secondary teacherswith 15 year experience range from less than USD 15 000 inHungary and the partner countries Chile and Estonia, toover USD 51 000 in Germany, Korea and Switzerland andexceed USD 90 000 in Luxembourg.
4848E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Changes in teachers’ salaries in lower secondary education, by point in the salary scale (1996,2006)
Index of change between 1996 and 2006 (1996=100, 2006 price levels using GDP deflators)
0
50
100
150
200
250
Hun
gary
Est
onia
Mex
ico
Fin
land
Aus
tral
ia
Eng
land
Denm
ark
Sco
tlan
d
Gre
ece
Ital
y
Jap
an
Irel
and
Nor
way
Belg
ium
(F
l.)1
Port
ugal
Net
her
land
s
New
Zeal
and
Bel
gium
(F
r.)1
Starting salary/minimum training Salary after 15 years of experience/ minimum training
Salary at top of scale/minimum training
1. The data for Belgium in 1996 are based on Belgium as a whole.
Index of change
D3.3
4949E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Number of teaching hours per year, by level of education (2006)
Net contact time in hours per year in public institutions
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
Uni
ted S
tate
s
Mexic
o
New
Zeal
and
Rus
sian
Federa
tion
Sco
tlan
d
Chile
Aus
tral
ia
Bra
zil
Isr
ael
Germ
any
Port
ugal
Neth
erl
ands
Ire
land
Spa
in
Slo
veni
a
Belg
ium
(F
l.)
Ice
land
Belg
ium
(F
r.)
Nor
way
Denm
ark
Lux
em
bou
rg
Cze
ch R
epu
blic
Fra
nce
Est
onia
Aus
tria
Ita
ly
Fin
land
Gre
ece
Hun
gary
Kor
ea
Tur
key
Lower secondary education
Upper secondary education, general programmes
Primary education
Hours per year
D4.2
A primary school teacher teaches an average of 812 hoursper year. Lower secondary education teachers teach anaverage of 717 hours per year. A teacher of uppersecondary general education has an average statutoryteaching load of 667 hours per year.
5050E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Parents’ reports of child’s past science reading and student performance on the PISA science scale (2006)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
New Z
ealand
Ice
land
Denm
ark
Lux
embou
rg
Cro
atia
Bulga
ria
Germ
any
Kor
ea
Ita
ly
Hon
g Kon
g-
China
Port
ugal
Maca
o-China
Qata
r
Tur
key
Colom
bia
Performance difference before accounting for social background
Performance difference after accounting for social background
Statistically significant differences are marked in darker tone. Score point difference
A6.1Source: OECD PISA 2006.
Compared with 15-year-old students who had not, at the age of 10,read books on scientific discoveries, students who had done soperformed, on average, 45 score points higher in the PISA 2006science assessment, more than the equivalent of a school year, andthis advantage remained significant, at 35 score points, even aftertaking into account socio-economic factors (one school yearcorresponds to an average of 38 score points on the PISA sciencescale).
5151E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Parents’ view of their child’s school and socio-economic background (PISA 2006)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Hon
g Kon
g-China
Cro
atia
Germ
any
Kor
ea
Tur
key
Lux
embou
rg
Ita
ly
Denm
ark
Maca
o-China
New Z
ealand
Port
ugal
Bulga
ria
Ice
land
Colom
bia
Poland
Qata
r
Difference in score before accounting for ESCS1
Difference in score after accounting for ESCS
Statistically significant differences are marked in darker tone. Score point difference
A6.2aSource: OECD PISA 2006.
a. ”Standards of achievement are high in the school”
5252E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Parents’ view of their child’s school and socio-economic background (PISA 2006)
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Hon
g Kon
g-China
Germ
any
New Z
ealand
Lux
embou
rg
Maca
o-China
Denm
ark
Cro
atia
Kor
ea
Port
ugal
Ita
ly
Ice
land
Tur
key
Poland
Colom
bia
Qata
r
Bulga
ria
Difference in score before accounting for ESCS1
Difference in score after accounting for ESCS
Statistically significant differences are marked in darker tone. Score point difference
A6.2bSource: OECD PISA 2006.
b. ”I am satisfied with the disciplinary atmosphere in the school”
5353E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Parents’ view of their child’s school and socio-economic background (PISA 2006)
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
New Z
ealand
Hon
g Kon
g-China
Denm
ark
Ice
land
Germ
any
Lux
embou
rg
Ita
ly
Tur
key
Maca
o-China
Qata
r
Cro
atia
Kor
ea
Port
ugal
Bulga
ria
Poland
Colom
bia
Difference in score before accounting for ESCS1
Difference in score after accounting for ESCS
Statistically significant differences are marked in darker tone. Score point difference
A6.2cSource: OECD PISA 2006.
c. ”The school does a good job in educating students”
5454E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Parents’ perceptions of instructional quality (PISA 2006)
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
Colombia
Croatia
Poland
Turkey
Bulgaria
Italy
Portugal
Korea
Qatar
Luxembourg
Germany
Macao-China
New Zealand
Iceland
Hong Kong-China
Denmark
Score point differenceScore point difference
Statistically significant differences are marked in darker tone
A6.3abSource: OECD PISA 2006.
a. ”Most of my child’s school teachers seem competent and dedicated”
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
Bulgaria
Croatia
Colombia
Luxembourg
Turkey
Poland
Portugal
Italy
Korea
Germany
Qatar
Macao-China
Iceland
New Zealand
Hong Kong-China
Denmark
b. ”I am happy with the content taught and the instructional methods used in my child’s school”
5555E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Parents’ perceptions of instructional quality (PISA 2006)
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
Bulgaria
Croatia
Luxembourg
Germany
Turkey
Portugal
Poland
Qatar
Italy
Macao-China
Korea
Hong Kong-China
Colombia
Denmark
New Zealand
Iceland
Score point differenceScore point difference
Statistically significant differences are marked in darker tone
A6.3cdSource: OECD PISA 2006.
c. ”My child’s progress is carefully monitored at school”
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
Bulgaria
Luxembourg
Portugal
Germany
Turkey
Croatia
Italy
Colombia
Qatar
Poland
Korea
Macao-China
Hong Kong-China
New Zealand
Denmark
Iceland
d. ”My child’s school provides regular and useful information on my child’s progress”
5656O
EC
D E
du
ca
tio
n
Ind
ica
tors
Pro
gra
mm
e2
00
8 e
dit
ion
of
Ed
uca
tio
n a
Gla
nc
e
Equity challenges
How well are countries using their potential to generate future human capital by providing equitable learning
opportunities?
5757E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Occupational status of higher education students’ fathers
Proportion of students with fathers from a blue-collar background compared with men of corresponding age group as students’
fathers in blue –collar occupations
40
18
29
5
19
29
20
16
45
21
38
7
35
56
3937
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Spain Ireland Finland Netherlands France Portugal Austria Germany
Students' father (Left hand scale) Men in same age group (Left hand scale)
Odds-ratio (Right hand scale)
A7.1Source: EUROSTUDENT 2005.
Ireland and Spain stand out as providing the most equitableaccess to higher education, whereas students from blue-collarbackground in Austria, France, Germany, Portugal are about one-half as likely to be in higher education as their proportion in thepopulation would suggest.
5858E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Educational status of students’ fathersProportion of students’ fathers with higher education compared with men of
corresponding age group as students’ fathers with higher education
54
48
4240 39
3229
2724
17
27 28
21
25
1821
911
22
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
United
Kingdom1
Finland France Netherlands Germany Spain Portugal Austria Ireland Italy
Students' fathers Men in same age group
1. England and Wales. Data refer to the parent (male or female) with the highest income.
Source: EUROSTUDENT 2005.
A7.2a
Finland, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom havethe largest intake of students with fathers holding a highereducation degree, whereas Ireland and Italy have the lowestintake from this group.
5959E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Educational status of students’ fathers (2004)Ratio of the proportion of students’ fathers with higher education to the proportion of men of the corresponding age group as students’ fathers with higher education
2.5
1.7
22.2
1.1
1.7 1.6
3.2
1.5
2
-0.5
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
Austria Finland France Germany Ireland Italy Netherlands Portugal Spain United
Kingdom1
Parent (male of female) with the highest income
1. England and Wales. Data refer to the parent (male or female) with the highest income.
Source: EUROSTUDENT 2005.
A7.2b
In Austria, France, Germany, Portugal and the United Kingdom,students are at least about twice as likely to be in higher educationif their fathers hold a university degree as their proportion in thepopulation would suggest.
6060E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Proportion of students in higher education (2003-2005) from a blue-collar backgroundand between school variance in PISA 2000
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Spain Ireland Finland France Portugal Austria Germany
Proportion of students from blue-collar background Between-school variance, PISA 2000
A7.3
Note: The first bar shows the ratio of students with fathers from a blue collar background compared with men of corresponding age group (’40-to-60-year-olds) in blue collar occupations. The second bar shows the betweenschool variance in mathematics from PISA 2000 survey. SOURCE: OECD PISA survey, EUROSTUDENT 2005.
Among the countries for which data are available on the socio-economic status of students in higher education, it appears thatproviding a good quality education across all schools is important tohave more students from less affluent backgrounds participating inhigher education.
6161E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
0 10 20 30
Portugal 2005
Czech Republic 2006
Luxembourg 2002
Hungary 2006
Poland 2006
Belgium 2005
France 2006
Spain 2004
Turkey 2005
Italy 2004
Sweden 2005
Ireland 2004
Netherlands 2002
Norway 2005
Denmark 2005
Australia 2005
Finland 2004
Korea 2003
United Kingdom 2006
United States 2006
Switzerland 2006
Israel 2006
Germany 2006
New Zealand 2006
Austria 2006
Canada 2005
%-30 -20 -10 0
Males Females
Share of 25-to-64-year-olds with lower education and high earnings and vice versa (2006 or latest available year)
A9.1
25-to-64-year-olds with tertiary education and earnings amounting to one half of the country median or less
25-to-64-year-olds with below upper secondary education and earnings amounting to twice the country median or more
Females with tertiary education are more disadvantaged than malesin terms of realising low earnings; in Austria, Canada and NewZealand, 20% or more of the female population earn less than halfthe median. While males are less likely to have low earnings, morethan 10% earn less than half of the median in Canada, Denmark,Norway and Sweden. This dispersion in educational outcomesprovides an indication of the overall investment risk associated withhigher education.
6262E
duc
atio
n Ind
icat
ors
Prog
ram
me
20
08
edit
ion
of
Educ
atio
n a
Gla
nce
Thank you !
www.oecd.org– All national and international publications
– The complete micro-level database
Email: [email protected]
… and remember:
Without data, you are just another person with an opinion
