英文翻譯-松江區(qū)人口結(jié)構(gòu)變遷與公共教育資源均衡配置研究

EquityandQualityinEducationSupportingDisadvantagedStudentsandSchoolsFOREWORDGlobalizationoftheeconomy,increasinglydiverseandinterconnectedpopulations,andrapidtechnologicalchangeareposingnewanddemandingchallengestoindividualsandsocietiesalike.Schoolsystemsarerethinkingtheknowledgeandskillsstudentswillneedforsuccessandtheeducationalstrategiesandsystemsrequiredforallchildrentoachievethem.InbothAsiaandNorthAmerica,urbanschoolsystemsareatthelocusofchangeinpolicyandpractice–atoncethesitesofthemostcriticalchallengesineducationandtheenginesofinnovationneededtoaddressthem.Therefore,AsiaSocietyorganizedtheGlobalCitiesEducationNetwork,anetworkofurbanschoolsystemsinNorthAmericaandAsiatofocusonchallengesandopportunitiesforimprovementcommontothem,andtovirtuallyallcityeducationsystems.Acriticalelementofhigh-performingschoolsystemsisthattheynotonlybenchmarkthepracticesofothercountries,buttheysystematicallyadaptandimplementthesepracticeswithintheirownculturalandpoliticalcontexts.TheGlobalCitiesEducationNetworkisintendedasamechanismforeducatorsanddecision-makersinAsiaandNorthAmericatocollaborativelydream,design,anddeliverinternationallyinformedsolutionstocommonchallengeswithwhicheducationsystemsarecurrentlygrappling.TheNetworkengagesincyclesofin-depthinquiry,planning,andactiontoaddressspecifictopicsrelatedtothethemesoftransforminglearningandachievingequity.Eachcycleinvolvesknowledgesharingandproblemsolving,includingatGlobalCitiesEducationNetworkSymposiaandtheproductionofresearchandknowledgeproductssuchascasestudies,backgroundpapers,andmeetingreports.Theoverarchinggoalistodeveloppracticalwisdomfromtheresearchandexperienceoftheworld’sleadingexpertswhichreflectsprovenorpromisingeffortsinNetworkcities,thatcanbeusedtoenhancetheeffectivenessofNetworkandcityschoolsystemsworld-wide.ThisreportpresentsthekeyrecommendationsoftheOECDpublicationEquityandQualityinEducation:SupportingDisadvantagedStudentsandSchools(2012a),whichmapsoutpolicyleversthatcanhelpbuildhighqualityandequitableeducationsystems,withaparticularfocusonNorthAmericanandAsian-Pacificcountries.IthasbeenpreparedbytheOECDEducationDirectoratewithsupportfromtheAsiaSocietyasaBackgroundReportforthefirstAsiaSocietyGlobalCitiesNetworkSymposium,HongKong,May10-12,2012.AsiaSocietyisgratefulforOECD’sleadershipininternationalbenchmarkingandforourongoingpartnership.WewouldliketothankthesponsorsoftheGlobalCitiesEducationNetworkincluding:JPMorganChaseFoundation,MetLifeFoundation,CarnegieCorporation,PearsonFoundation,andHewlettFoundation.WehopethatthisseriesofreportsprovidesknowledgeandexperienceusefultocitiesinAsia,NorthAmerica,andelsewhereeagertocreatetheconditionsthatwillpromotesuccessforallstudentsintoday’sinterconnectedworld.1.EQUITYINEDUCATION:AKEYCHALLENGEThehighestperformingeducationsystemsarethosethatcombinequalitywithequity.Equityineducationmeansthatpersonalorsocialcircumstancessuchasgender,ethnicoriginorfamilybackground,arenotobstaclestoachievingeducationalpotential(definitionoffairness)andthatallindividualsreachatleastabasicminimumlevelofskills(definitionofinclusion).Intheseeducationsystems,thevastmajorityofstudentshavetheopportunitytoattainhighlevelskills,regardlessoftheirownpersonalandsocio-economiccircumstances.WithintheAsia-Pacificregion,forexample,Korea,Shanghai-ChinaandJapanareexamplesofAsianeducationsystemsthathaveclimbedtheladdertothetopinbothqualityandequityindicators.InNorthAmerica,Canadaisamongsuchcountriesaswell.TheUnitedStatesisabovetheOECDmeaninreadingperformancebutbelowthemeanwithregardtoequity.Yet,eveninhighperformingsystemsasignificantnumberofstudentsfailtoobtainaminimumlevelofeducation,jeopardizingtheirownfutureandtheprogressoftheirsociety.Thedegreeofinclusionofaneducationsystemcanbemeasuredbythepercentageoflowperformersandindividualswhodonotattainuppersecondaryeducation(OECD,2012a).InPISA2009,19%of15-year-oldstudentsscoredbelowLevel2inreadingacrossOECDcountries,whichsignalsthatalmostoneoutoffiveyoungstersacrossOECDcountrieslacksbasicliteracyskills,andinsomecountriesthisproportionevenexceeded25%(SeeFigure1.3).Itisverylikelythatthoselackingbasicskillsatthisagewilleitherdropoutfromtheeducationsystemandnotfinishuppersecondaryschool,enteringtheworkforcewithlowskillsandunprepared,orwillcontinuestudyingbutstrugglingmorethantheirpeersandneedingadditional(andmoreexpensive)support.Indeed,thepercentageof25-34years-oldsthathavenotattaineduppersecondaryeducationreachesalmost20%ofyoungpeopleacrossOECDcountries(SeeFigure1.2),althoughitvariesmarkedly,from3%inKoreato62%inTurkey(OECD,2011a).Students’backgroundhasasignificantimpactontheiracademicachievementinmanycountries,andoften,lowsocio-economicbackgroundandlowperformanceconvergeinspecificpopulationgroups.Theincreasedlikelihoodofdisadvantagedstudentstoperformbelowlevel2canbeinterpretedasanindicatoroffairnessofaneducationsystem(OECD,2012a).Forexample,inKorea,thefewstudentsthatdonotachievebasicskillsareoftendisadvantagedstudents.Inthiscountry,studentsfromlowsocio-economicstatusarealmost3.5timesmorelikelytobelowperformersthantheirpeerswithahighstatus(SeeFigure1.3).Reducingschoolfailurepaysoffforbothsocietyandindividualandcontributestoeconomicgrowthandsocialdevelopment.Theeconomicandsocialcostsofschoolfailureanddropoutarehigh,whereasinvestingearlyineducation(Heckman,2011)andupuntiluppersecondaryeducationcompletionisefficient.Individualswithatleastuppersecondaryeducationhavebetteremploymentandhealthierlifestyleprospects,resultingingreatercontributionstopublicinvestmentthroughhighertaxes.Moreeducatedpeoplecontributetosustainableeconomies,andarelessdependentonpublicaidandlessvulnerabletoeconomicdownturnswhichinturncontributetomoreequitablesocieties(OECD,2011b). EducationisacentralelementofOECDcountries’growthstrategies.Tobeeffectiveinthelongrun,improvementsineducationneedtoenableallstudentstohaveaccesstoqualityeducationearly,tostayinthesystemuntilatleasttheendofuppersecondaryeducation,andtoobtaintheskillsandknowledgetheywillneedforeffectivesocialandlabourmarketintegration.This can bedonewithtwoparallelstrategies:Bydesigningeducationsystemsthatareconducivetoequity:Morespecifically,somesystemicpractices,suchasearlytracking,repetition,certainschoolchoiceschemesorlowqualityvocationaleducationandtrainingtendtoamplifysocialandeconomicdisadvantagesandareconducivetoschoolfailure.Section2reviewssystemlevelpracticesthathinderequityandprovidesfiverecommendationstopreventfailureandpromotethecompletionofuppersecondaryeducation.Thiscanhelpreinforceequityacrossthesystemandbenefitdisadvantagedstudentswithouthinderingotherstudents’progress.Byfocusingonandsupportingdisadvantagedschools:Schoolswithhigherproportionsofdisadvantagedstudentsareatgreaterriskofproblemsthatcanresultinunderperformance,affectingeducationsystemsasawhole.Lowperformingdisadvantagedschoolsoftenlacktheinternalcapacityorsupporttoimprove,asschoolleadersandteachersandtheenvironmentsofschools,classroomsandneighbourhoodsfrequentlyfailtoofferaqualitylearningexperienceforthemostdisadvantaged.Section3proposesfivepolicyrecommendationsthathaveshowntobeeffectiveinsupportingtheimprovementoflowperformingdisadvantagedschools.Whiletheseapplytoallschools,theyareparticularlyrelevantforlowperformingdisadvantagedschools,wheretheymaybehardertoachievebutcandeliverimprovements.Addressingthesechallengesisadifficultendeavourinanycountry.Improvementsacrossanentireeducationsystemcancomeonlywithstrongandconsistentpoliticalsupportandleadershipsustainedovertime.Italsorequirespolicydesignandimplementationthatisalignedtogovernancestructures.Inthisregard,settinghighachievementtargetsorstandardsisimportanttoraisethebarandsignalequitypriorities(Section4).2.TACKLINGSYSTEMLEVELPOLICIESTHATHINDEREQUITYINEDUCATIONEducationsystemsandthepathwaysthroughthemneedtobedesignedinawaythatbothenhancesequityandraisesstudents’success.Yet,somesystemlevelpolicies,suchasgraderepetitionorearlytracking,tendtoamplifysocio-economicdisparitiesandareconducivetodisengagementanddropout,whereasotherpoliciesseemtomitigatethem(CausaandChapuis,2009).Thissectionpresentsanddevelopsfivespecificsystemlevelpolicyleversthatcanreduceinequitiesineducationandcontributetoimproveoverallperformance.2.1.EliminategraderepetitionChallenge:graderepetitionisacommonpracticeinmanyOECDcountriesGraderepetitionoccurswhenstudents,afteraformalorinformalassessment,areheldbackinthesamegradeforanadditionalyear,ratherthanbeingpromotedtothenextstagealongwiththeirpeers.GraderepetitionispractisedinmanyOECDcountries:13%of15-year-oldsarereportedtohaverepeatedatleastoneyeareitherinprimaryorsecondaryschool(Figure2.2).ThisproportionisparticularlyhighinthepartnereconomyMacao-China,whereitaffectsover40%ofstudents.Schoolsystemsthatextensivelyuserepetitionareassociatedwithlowlevelsofeducationalperformance(OECD,2010b),whilestrategiestosupporteachindividualprevailincountrieswithhigherperformancelevels.Evidence:highandlastingcosts,whilebenefitsareslightandshort-livedThecostsofgraderepetitionarelargeforbothindividualsandsociety.First,thedirectcostsforschoolsystemsareveryhigh,astheseincludeprovidinganadditionalyearofeducationanddelayingentrytothelabourmarketbyayear.Second,itincreasesthelikelihoodofearningnoqualificationoronlyalowersecondaryone,whiletheacademicbenefitsofgraderetentionareslightandshort-livedastheseaccruefromgoingoverthesamecurriculaasecondtime(JacobandLefgren,2009).Third,graderetentionwidensinequitiesbecausestudentswithlowsocio-economicbackgrounds,poorlyeducatedparentsorimmigrantbackgrounds,andboys,aresignificantlymorelikelytorepeatthanothers(OECD,2011d).Inmanycountries,schoolshavefewincentivestotakeintoaccountthehighcostsgraderepetitionbearsonthesystem.Ononehand,boththeadditionalandopportunitycostsdonotdecreasethefundingthatindividualschoolsreceive(Field,KuczeraandPont,2007),whilealternativepracticesthatcanreducetheuseofrepetitionveryoftenhavedirectcostsforschools.Ontheotherhand,teacherswidelysupportthepracticeastheyobservetheimmediategainsbutnotthelong-termnegativeeffects(Jimerson,AndersonandWhipple,2002),andmovingweakerstudentstothefollowingyearwouldrequirethemtoteachinmorechallengingmixed-abilityenvironments,forwhichtheymaynotbepreparedorsupported.Preventivemeasures:ensurecontinuousassessmentandsupportstrategies.Themostsuccessfulalternativesarefocusedonpreventiontomakerepetitionunnecessary,providingtheneededsupporttothosefallingbehindbeforetheendoftheschoolyearandputtingthembackontrackontime,beforethelearninggapswiden,asdoneinFinlandandJapan(SeeBox2.1).Continuousassessmentofstudents’needscanfacilitatethedesignandimplementationoftailoredsupportprogrammesasearlyaspossible.Theseincludeimprovingteachers’skillstoteachinclassroomswithmorediverseattainmentlevels,extendinglearningopportunitiesaswellasdiversifyingthestrategiestosupportlearning,andstrengtheningstudents’meta-cognitiveskills.Promotionwithsupport.Repetitionratescanbereducedbyrestrictingthecriteriathatdeterminewhetherastudentistobeheldbackandbyestablishingfurtheropportunitiestomoveforward.However,promotionshouldbecombinedwithastructuredandengagingplanofsupporttocorrecteducationaldeficitsandmeettheeducationalstandards.Also,repetitioncanbelimitedtothesubjectsormodulesfailedinsteadofyear-repetition.Forexample,inCanada,NewZealandandtheUnitedStates,retentionisusuallyrestrictedtothespecificclassesthatthestudentfailed.Astudentcanbe,forinstance,promotedinamathclassbutretainedinalanguageclass.Reversingthecultureofgraderepetitioninschools.Educationalauthoritiesshouldraiseteacherawarenessofitsconsequences,offersupportandresources,andalsoincludeteachersandschoolleadersinsearchingforalternativestohelpstudentswithlearningdifficulties.Inaddition,financialincentivesandtargetsforreductionofrepetitioncanbeintroducedintoaccountabilitysystems.Forexample,inFrancerepetitionlevelshavesubstantiallydecreasedsincespecifictargetstoholdschoolsaccountableforgraderepetitionrateswereestablishedinparallelwithindividualisedsupportandcatchupopportunities.2.2AvoidearlytrackinganddeferstudentselectiontouppersecondaryChallenge:earlystudentselectionisacommonpracticeStudentselectionreferstotrackingstudentsintodifferentstudyprogrammesorgroupingthemintoclassroomsaccordingtotheirabilities,eitherinallorfewsubjects.SelectionoccursinallOECDcountries,butthereareimportantdifferencesbetweencountriesinthetimingandformofthisselection.Withanaverageageoffirstformalselectionat14yearsacrossOECD(OECD,2010b),somecountries,suchasFinland,NorwayorSpain,havenon-selectiveandcomprehensiveschoolsystemsuptotheendoflowersecondaryeducation.OthercountriessuchasAustriaandGermany,respondtothediversitychallengebysortingchildrenbetweendifferentcurriculaorlevelsofdifficultywhentheyarejust10yearsold,withtheaimofservingthemaccordingtotheirlearningneedsandacademicpotential.Also,intheUnitedStatesandCanada,forexample,morethan90%of15year-oldstudentsareinschoolsthatgroupstudentsbyability(SeeFigure2.3).Theseearlytrackingpracticesmayresultingreaterinequitiesandastrongerinfluenceofsocioeconomicbackgroundoneducation.Evidence:academicselectionwidensachievementgapsandinequitiesProponentsofgroupingstudentsaccordingtotheirperformancesuggestthatstudentslearnbetterwhengroupedwithotherslikethemselvesandwhenteachingcanbeadaptedtotheirneeds.Incontrast,evidenceshowsthatearlystudentselectionhasanegativeimpactonstudentsassignedtolowertracks,withoutraisingtheperformanceofthewholestudentpopulation(HanushekandWoessmann,2006).Lessdemandingtrackstendtoprovidelessstimulatinglearningenvironmentsandfuelaviciouscycleintheexpectationsofteachersandstudents.Also,students’placedinlessdemandingtracksdonotbenefitfromthepositiveeffectsofbeingaroundmorecapablepeers(HanushekandWoessmann,2006).Evidenceshowsthatthetrackwherestudentsareassignedhasagreatimpactontheireducationalandlifeprospects(ShavitandMüller,2006).Inaddition,selectionexacerbatesinequitiessincestudentsfromdisadvantagedbackgroundsaremorelikelytobeplacedintheleastacademicallyorientedtracksorgroups(SpinathandSpinath,2005).Forexample,studentswithanimmigrantbackground,whentrackedatanearlystage,maybelockedintoalowereducationalenvironmentbeforetheyhavehadachancetodevelopthelinguistic,socialandculturalskillstoattaintheirmaximumpotential(OECD,2010c).Delayselectionandadoptcomprehensiveschoolinguntiluppersecondaryschool.ManyOECDcountrieshaveadoptedcomprehensiveeducationmeasures,andraisedtheageoffirsttrackingorpostponedittoalaterstageoftheeducationalprocess–mostcommonlytotheendoflowersecondaryeducation.TheNordiccountrieswereamongthefirsttomakethechangeinthe1970sandbecameareferenceofcomprehensiveeducationsystems.OneofthemostrecentreformswasundertakeninPoland,whereearlytrackingwaspostponedoneyear,untiltheageof15.Thereformraisedstudents’performancesubstantially,particularlyforthosestudentsthatwouldhavebeenassignedintovocationaltracks,withouthinderingtheperformanceoftopachievers(Wisniewski,2007).Reducethelevelofearlytrackingbyeliminatinglowleveltracks.Incontextswherekeystakeholdersmaybereluctanttoendearlytracking,suppressinglow-leveltracksorgroupsorensuringthattheseofferequivalenteducationopportunitiesandoutcomestootherpathwayscanmitigatesomeofthenegativeeffectsoftracking.Thiscouldbeparticularlybeneficialinsystemsinwhichtherearedifferentandveryimpermeabletracksinahierarchy.Inrecentyears,Austria,Luxembourg,SlovakRepublicandsomeGermanstateshavetakenstepsinthisdirection.Limitthenegativeeffectsofearlyselection.Incountrieswherestudentsaretracked,streamedorgroupedbyabilityearly,avarietyofpoliciesandpracticescanbeexploredtolimitthenegativeeffectsandembracedifferentiatedinstructioninmixed-abilitysettings.Oneoptionistolimitabilitygroupingtospecificsubjectsorreplaceitwithshort-termflexiblegroupingforspecificpurposes,whileclassesremainheterogeneous.Forinstance,Nordiccountriesusetemporarygroupingswiththepossibilityofchanginggroups,whichallowflexibilitytomeetspecificacademicneedsduringtheschoolyear.Anotheroptionconsistsinincreasingflexibilitytochangetracksorclassrooms,andimprovingtheselectionmethodsforthedifferenttracksorgroups.Afurtheroptionistoensurethatalltracksgivestudentsachallengingcurriculumandhighqualityinstruction.2.3.ManageschoolchoicetoavoidsegregationandincreasedinequitiesChallenge:schoolchoiceisarealityinOECDcountriesInthelast25years,morethantwo-thirdsofOECDcountrieshaveincreasedtheextentofparentalschoolchoiceinpublicly(andinsomecountriesalsoprivately)fundedschools.Advocatesoftenarguethatschoolchoicewouldallowallstudents–includingdisadvantagedonesandthoseattendinglowperformingschools–tooptforhigherqualityschools,astheintroductionofchoiceineducationcanfosterefficiency,spurinnovationandraisequalityoverall.Theevidencehowevershowsthatchoice,ifnotwellmanaged,cangenerategreaterinequalities,withoutnecessarilyraisingoverallperformance.Researchhasshownthatoversubscribedschoolsareselectiveintheiradmissionsandtendtopreferstudentswhoareeasiertoteachandmoreabletolearn,crowdingoutstudentswithlowperformance教育的公平與質(zhì)量———支持弱勢(shì)學(xué)生與學(xué)校前言：全球化的經(jīng)濟(jì)、日益密切的人群聯(lián)系以及快速的技術(shù)變革正在給人類(lèi)和整個(gè)社會(huì)帶來(lái)巨大的挑戰(zhàn)。教育系統(tǒng)正在反思目前學(xué)生所具備的知識(shí)和技能能否成功達(dá)到教育戰(zhàn)略對(duì)兒童培養(yǎng)的要求。在亞洲和北美地區(qū)，城市的教學(xué)系統(tǒng)是遵循政策實(shí)施的軌跡的。這就是在最關(guān)鍵的挑戰(zhàn)和最創(chuàng)新的工程所需要解決的問(wèn)題。因此，亞洲協(xié)會(huì)舉辦的全球城市教育網(wǎng)組織，一個(gè)在北美和亞洲的網(wǎng)站，去動(dòng)用所有的城市教育資源從中尋找機(jī)遇與挑戰(zhàn)并改善他們。一個(gè)高效的教學(xué)系統(tǒng)的關(guān)鍵因素是，他們不僅將其他國(guó)家的做法用作參考，而且在自己的文化和政治背景下適應(yīng)并且實(shí)施這些做法。全球城市教育網(wǎng)的目的是一種為教育工作者設(shè)計(jì)的機(jī)制，同時(shí)亞洲和北美洲的決策者為了協(xié)作的提供一種符合國(guó)際實(shí)情的解決方案，而且這一教育系統(tǒng)與目前的教育資源結(jié)合情況良好。將網(wǎng)絡(luò)技術(shù)運(yùn)用到深入地調(diào)查、計(jì)劃和執(zhí)行以解決某些關(guān)于如何實(shí)現(xiàn)教育公平的主題上。在全球城市網(wǎng)絡(luò)教育研討會(huì)上以案例研究等形式，每輪會(huì)議的議題都包括知識(shí)的分享和問(wèn)題的解決。其總體目標(biāo)是從研究和經(jīng)驗(yàn)中發(fā)展處實(shí)際的智慧，并以此證明網(wǎng)絡(luò)城市是有前途的，并可以用來(lái)加強(qiáng)網(wǎng)絡(luò)的有效性以及發(fā)展世界各地的城市教育系統(tǒng)。本報(bào)告主要介紹了來(lái)自經(jīng)合組織關(guān)于公平教育的主要建議：支持弱勢(shì)的學(xué)校和學(xué)時(shí)（2012年）這反應(yīng)了目前的政策水平，這對(duì)于構(gòu)建高品質(zhì)和公平的教育系統(tǒng)非常有幫助，尤其是北美和亞太國(guó)家。在以亞洲協(xié)會(huì)全球城市網(wǎng)絡(luò)作為主體的研討會(huì)上，在經(jīng)合組織教育部門(mén)的支持下，這個(gè)想法已經(jīng)進(jìn)入籌備階段。我們要感謝全球城市教育網(wǎng)絡(luò)的贊助商包括：摩根大通基金會(huì)，大都會(huì)人壽基金會(huì)，卡內(nèi)基公司，皮爾森基金會(huì)和休利特基金會(huì)。我們希望這一系列報(bào)告提供的知識(shí)有助于在亞洲和北美乃至其他國(guó)家的城市中創(chuàng)造促進(jìn)所有學(xué)生公平教育的條件。教育公平：一個(gè)關(guān)鍵的挑戰(zhàn)高效的教育體系是指那些質(zhì)量與公平相結(jié)合。教育公平是指?jìng)€(gè)人或社會(huì)的情況，如性別，種族或家庭背景不構(gòu)成實(shí)現(xiàn)教育潛力（公平的定義）和所有個(gè)人達(dá)到技能（包括定義）至少有一個(gè)基本的最低水平的障礙。在這些教育系統(tǒng)中，學(xué)生絕大多數(shù)有機(jī)會(huì)獲得高層次的技能，無(wú)論自己的個(gè)人和社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)情況。以亞太地區(qū)為例，韓國(guó)，上海，中國(guó)和日本的教育系統(tǒng)是在質(zhì)量和公平上以達(dá)到較高水準(zhǔn)的幾個(gè)例子。在北美，加拿大這樣的國(guó)家也是如此。然而，即使是在高性能系統(tǒng)中，一定數(shù)量的學(xué)生仍然無(wú)法獲得最基本的教育，這將阻礙他們的未來(lái)以及整個(gè)社會(huì)的進(jìn)步。納入教育體系的程度可以通過(guò)無(wú)法獲得高中教育個(gè)體的數(shù)量占整體的百分比來(lái)衡量（經(jīng)濟(jì)合作與發(fā)展組織，2012）。2009年的國(guó)際學(xué)生評(píng)估項(xiàng)目中，經(jīng)濟(jì)合作與發(fā)展組織國(guó)家中，19％的15歲學(xué)生在閱讀項(xiàng)目中獲得了低于等級(jí)二的成績(jī)，這就意味著幾乎五分之一的經(jīng)合組織國(guó)家中的青年人缺乏基本的識(shí)字能力，在某些國(guó)家這個(gè)比例甚至高于25%。那些缺乏基本技能的青年會(huì)從教育系統(tǒng)中輟學(xué)，并且不會(huì)完成高中教育，他們僅僅擁有低技能，并且毫無(wú)準(zhǔn)備地進(jìn)入勞動(dòng)力市場(chǎng)。要是他們繼續(xù)學(xué)習(xí)的話，這就意味著他們將比同齡人付出更多的努力和需要更多（昂貴）的支持。事實(shí)上，在經(jīng)合組織國(guó)家中25-34歲的孩子沒(méi)有達(dá)到高中教育的比例達(dá)到將近20%。盡管差異性非常大，韓國(guó)這一比例為3％，然而在土耳其這一比例高達(dá)62％（經(jīng)合組織，2011）。學(xué)生背景在許多國(guó)家對(duì)他們的學(xué)業(yè)成就有很顯著的影響，通常情況下，低社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)背景和低效能會(huì)集合在特定人群中。弱勢(shì)學(xué)生在測(cè)試中低于等級(jí)二的數(shù)量的增加將被解讀為是教育系統(tǒng)公平性的一個(gè)指標(biāo)（經(jīng)合組織，2012）。例如，在韓國(guó)，沒(méi)有達(dá)到基本的技能的少數(shù)學(xué)生往往被認(rèn)定為弱勢(shì)學(xué)生。在這個(gè)國(guó)家，來(lái)自于低社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位的學(xué)生表現(xiàn)出低效能的可能性比來(lái)自高地位的學(xué)生高3.5倍。降低學(xué)業(yè)失敗的可能性對(duì)個(gè)人或者社會(huì)以及社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展都很有幫助。學(xué)業(yè)失敗和輟學(xué)的經(jīng)濟(jì)社會(huì)成本很高，然而早一些投資并且持續(xù)到高中完成的做法更有效率。一個(gè)至少獲得高中教育的人擁有更好的就業(yè)和健康的生活，導(dǎo)致他通過(guò)繳納高稅收向公共社會(huì)給與更多貢獻(xiàn)。更多受過(guò)教育的人致力于可持續(xù)發(fā)展的經(jīng)濟(jì)，同時(shí)較少的依賴(lài)公共援助和較少受到經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退的影響，反過(guò)來(lái)更好的促進(jìn)社會(huì)公平發(fā)展（經(jīng)合組織，2011年）。教育是經(jīng)合組織國(guó)家發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略的核心要素。為了長(zhǎng)期運(yùn)行有效，能夠從教育中收獲益處必須讓學(xué)生盡可能接觸優(yōu)質(zhì)的教育，并且盡可能能夠呆到高中教育結(jié)束，以確保獲得足夠的技能和知識(shí)，這些技能和知識(shí)會(huì)對(duì)他們?cè)诼殘?chǎng)上找到自己的為止有所幫助。有兩個(gè)非常重要的戰(zhàn)略可以實(shí)施：·通過(guò)設(shè)計(jì)一個(gè)有利于教育公平的教育系統(tǒng)：更具體的說(shuō)是，早期的追蹤、重復(fù)、確認(rèn)學(xué)生沒(méi)有選擇一個(gè)低質(zhì)量的教育計(jì)劃，這往往會(huì)放大社會(huì)和經(jīng)濟(jì)的劣勢(shì)，從而導(dǎo)致學(xué)業(yè)的失敗。第二部分評(píng)估系統(tǒng)實(shí)施情況，并提供五項(xiàng)建議避免學(xué)業(yè)失敗，促進(jìn)高中教育的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。這可以幫助強(qiáng)化整個(gè)系統(tǒng)公平，所有這些行為對(duì)貧困學(xué)生都是非常有利的，同時(shí)又不會(huì)妨礙其他學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)進(jìn)度。·通過(guò)關(guān)注和支持弱勢(shì)學(xué)校：學(xué)校擁有弱勢(shì)學(xué)生的比例越高，面臨問(wèn)題的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的比例也越高，這可能影響作為一個(gè)整體的教育系統(tǒng)。低效的弱勢(shì)學(xué)校常常缺乏有能力的人才的支持。按照經(jīng)驗(yàn)，作為學(xué)校的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)和老師，教師和社區(qū)環(huán)境，沒(méi)法提供優(yōu)質(zhì)的學(xué)習(xí)必須條件是導(dǎo)致弱勢(shì)學(xué)校的關(guān)鍵因素。第三章節(jié)提出了五項(xiàng)政策建議以達(dá)到有效支持弱勢(shì)學(xué)校的發(fā)展。雖然這適用于所有學(xué)校，但是他們對(duì)低效的弱勢(shì)學(xué)校尤其有效，因?yàn)檫@樣做，他們更有可能實(shí)現(xiàn)自身的進(jìn)步。在任何國(guó)家，應(yīng)對(duì)這些挑戰(zhàn)都是一項(xiàng)艱巨的任務(wù)。強(qiáng)大而持續(xù)的政府支持以及領(lǐng)導(dǎo)持續(xù)的關(guān)注只能對(duì)教育系統(tǒng)發(fā)展的影響起到短暫的效果。這還需要政策在設(shè)計(jì)和實(shí)施過(guò)程中考慮到自身結(jié)構(gòu)的問(wèn)題，從這方面講，設(shè)置一個(gè)高的目標(biāo)以及設(shè)立高標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對(duì)提升整體教育公平有更顯著的作用。（第四章節(jié)）追蹤制度層面的政策如何阻礙教育公平教育系統(tǒng)以及實(shí)現(xiàn)教育公平的途徑需要被設(shè)計(jì)出來(lái)，既強(qiáng)化公平也能使學(xué)生成功。然而，一些制度層面的政策，例如六級(jí)和提前跟蹤，都能放大社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)差距，促使輟學(xué)行為的發(fā)生，而其他政策卻能緩解他們（Causa和Chapuis，2009年）。本節(jié)提出并發(fā)展處五個(gè)具體的制度層面的政策杠桿，用以減少教育不平等并有助于提高整體的性能。2.1消除留級(jí)難題：留級(jí)是經(jīng)合組織國(guó)家的普遍做法留級(jí)主要發(fā)生在，當(dāng)一個(gè)學(xué)生經(jīng)過(guò)正式或者非正式的評(píng)估，必須在同一水平再進(jìn)行一年的額外學(xué)習(xí)，而不是和他的同齡人一樣晉升到人生的下一個(gè)學(xué)習(xí)階段。留級(jí)普遍發(fā)生在許多經(jīng)合組織國(guó)家：13%的15歲學(xué)生被報(bào)道需要