1 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Education at a Glance 2007 Key results for Hungary Michael Davidson Senior Analyst, OECD Education Directorate 18 September.
Download ReportTranscript 1 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Education at a Glance 2007 Key results for Hungary Michael Davidson Senior Analyst, OECD Education Directorate 18 September.
1 1 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Education at a Glance 2007 Key results for Hungary Michael Davidson Senior Analyst, OECD Education Directorate 18 September 2007 2 Quantity and quality challenges Education systems continue to expand at a rapid pace; more and more of the population are educated to the tertiary level Hungary has advanced but not as fast as some other countries Is there scope for further expansion of tertiary education? Is there a risk of over–supply of the highly qualified? Growth in university-level qualifications Tertiarybyattainment has of increased in Hungary …butqualification not as Approximated the percentage persons with ISCED 5A/6 in the age groups shown below fast as inborn some other countries…so that(2005) Hungary is now below the OECD average 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 50 % 45 40 35 30 25 5 1 20 25 15 4 10 27 13 Austria Slovenia Turkey Mexico Portugal Italy Chile1 Greece Korea Belgium Slovak Republic Ireland Czech Republic France Luxembourg Spain New Zealand Finland Poland Germany Japan OECD average EU19 average 1. Year of reference 2004. 2. Year of reference 2003. Switzerland Hungary Australia Sweden Iceland Canada Estonia Denmark Norway United Kingdom A1.3a Netherlands Israel 0 Russian… 5 United States 3 3 4 4 University graduation rates (2004, 2005) Percentage of tertiary type A graduates to the population at the typical age of graduation %70 But current graduation rates suggest that Hungary is making progress. University graduates increased sharply in the last year and are now at the OECD average, though drop out is relatively high and the the number of science graduates relative to population is lower in Hungary than in any other OECD country. 2004 60 50 40 30 20 2005 10 0 Hungary A3.1 OECD average EU19 average 1. Net graduation rate is calculated by summing the graduation rates by single year of age in 2005. 2. Year of reference 2004. Relative earnings premium from having a university degree 5 5 (2005 or latest available year) The earnings benefits from Males Femalesholding a university degree are positive and strong among OECD 260 countries. In Hungary they are particularly strong240 males aged 25-64 with a univeristy degree earn on 220 average 153% more than someone with only upper 200 secondary education. 180 160 140 120 3. Year of reference 2004. 4. Year of reference 2005. Korea2 Norway3 Denmark3 Australia4 Spain3 Sweden3 New Zealand4 Turkey3 Switzerland4 Belgium3 Germany4 France4 Canada3 Luxembourg1 Austria4 Ireland3 Israel4 Finland3 Portugal3 Italy3 Poland3 United States4 1. Year of reference 2002. 2. Year of reference 2003. United Kingdom4 A9.2 Czech Republic4 100 Hungary4 % of index For 25-to-64-year-olds (upper secondary education= 100). 7 7 Is there a danger in producing too many highly qualified people? Analysis that: of this year’s indicators show In countries that have expanded tertiary education the labour market benefits of attaining a tertiary degree are still strong No evidence that tertiary expansion damages the labour market prospects of the less qualified (no “crowding out”) On the contrary, it seems that the least educated individuals benefit in terms of better unemployment opportunities when more people go into higher education. 8 Equity challenges Achieving strong baseline qualifications is a cornerstone of equity. Strong expansion of secondary education in Hungary But penalties for those who miss out are significant Equity concerns in the Hungarian education system 9 9 Population has attained at least Achieving baseline that qualifications is a crucial foundation for equity. upper secondary education (2005) by age group The proportion ofPercentage the population that has completed upper 25-34 education 35-44 45-54 been 55-64rising in almost all OECD secondary has countries, and rapidly in some. In Hungary 85% of people aged 25-34 years have attained upper secondary qualificationsabove the OECD average of 77%. 100 90 80 70 3 1 60 50 12 40 12 24 10 30 20 10 A1.2 1. Excluding ISCED 3C short programmes 3. Including some ISCED 3C short programmes 2. Year of reference 2004 3. Year of reference 2003. Brazil2 Mexico Portugal Turkey Spain Italy Greece Chile2 Korea Ireland Poland Belgium Iceland Australia France OECD average EU19 average Luxembourg Netherlands United Kingdom3 Finland Hungary New Zealand Slovak Republic Israel Slovenia Austria3 Russian Federation4 Sweden Norway Canada Denmark Switzerland Germany Estonia Czech Republic 0 United States % 10 10 Enrolment rates of 15-19 year olds (1995, 2000, 2005) Percentage of 15-19 year old population who are enrolled in education % 100 1995 90 2000 2005 Increasing participation in secondary education in Hungary is evident through trends in enrolment rates of 15-19 year olds. Whereas these rates were below the OECD and EU averages in 1995, they now comfortably exceed the OECD and EU averages. 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Hungary A3.1 OECD average EU19 average Relative earnings penalty from not completing upper secondary education (2005 or latest available year) For 25-to-64-year-olds The earnings disadvantage for not completing upper (upper secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education= 100). secondary education is significant and for some Males countries has worsened over time. Such penalties are 110 relatively high in Hungary: those without upper secondary qualifications earn only 73% of those that 90 have these qualifications. 70 50 1. Year of reference 2002. 2. Year of reference 2003. 3. Year of reference 2004. 4. Year of reference 2005. Germany4 Finland3 Belgium3 France4 Australia4 Sweden3 Norway3 Spain3 Ireland3 Denmark3 Luxembourg1 New Zealand4 Switzerland4 Canada3 Czech Republic4 Italy3 Poland3 Austria4 Hungary4 Israel4 Korea2 Turkey3 United Kingdom4 A9.2 United States4 30 Portugal3 % of index 11 11 Participation of the labour force in non-formal jobrelated continuing education and training (2004) 12 12 % 45 40 35 Non-formal job-related training can provide 2nd chance opportunities With only 4 % of the population in this type of education and training, adults in Hungary seem not to have these opportunitites 30 25 20 15 10 OECD average Greece Italy Hungary Spain Portugal Poland Netherlands Ireland Czech Republic Germany Luxembourg Belgium Austria France Slovak Republic Canada Switzerland United Kingdom C5.1a Finland Denmark Sweden 0 United States 5 Influence of socio-economic background on expectations to complete tertiary education 14 14 3 ability, Hungarian students from higher socioeconomic backgrounds are 2.7 times more likely Odds ratio to have higher educational expectations than those from low socio-economic groups. 2 1 Netherlands Turkey New Zealand France Finland United States Sweden Portugal Mexico Luxembourg Ireland Iceland Denmark Australia Canada Spain Norway Korea Japan Poland Italy Czech Republic Belgium Slovak Republic Greece Germany Austria 1. Response rate too low to ensure comparability. United Kingdom1 A4.4 Switzerland 0 Hungary % Odds ratio after that students expect to complete tertiary education, Even allowing for differences in academic after adjusting for student performance (2003) 15 Resource and efficiency challenges Trends in educational expenditure Factors affecting spending levels Has expenditure kept pace with expansion of tertiary education? How should further expansion be funded? Expenditure on educational institutions as 16 16 a percentage of GDP for all levels of education (1995, 2004) OECD countries spend 6.2 %1995 of theirOECD collective GDP on 2004 total % of GDP educational institutions. Unlike a number of countries, the 10 increase in spending on education in Hungary between 9 1995 and 2004 exceeded the growth in national income 8 but remains below the OECD average. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 B2.1 Luxembourg2 Canada Brazil2 Estonia2 Norway2 Greece Turkey Ireland Spain Japan Slovak Republic Czech Republic Italy Netherlands Germany Portugal Austria Hungary Australia Russian Federation2 1. Years of reference 2005 and 1995. 2. Expenditure from public sources only. United Kingdom Poland Finland Belgium France Switzerland Slovenia Mexico Chile1 Sweden New Zealand Denmark Korea United States Iceland Israel 0 17 17 Annual expenditure on educational institutions per student In equivalent USD converted using PPPs, based on full time equivalents US dollars 7000 6000 5000 4000 Primary Secondary Tertiary On a per student basis, Hungary spends well below the OECD and EU averages. However, taking account of countries’ relative wealth, Hungarian spending per student is closer to or in fact exceeds the OECD average. 3000 2000 1000 0 Hungary B1.1 OECD average EU19 average 18 18 Influences on primary and secondary spending Expenditure per primary and as secondary studentsin Changes in the number of students well as changes increased in every country between and 2004. expenditure on educational institutions per1995 student, by level In 18 outof ofeducation the 25 OECD countries and partner (1995,2004) economies for which data are available, changes exceed 20 % between 1995 and 2004 .In Hungary Primary, secondary and post-secondary non –tertiary education this increase was more than 50 %. Change in expenditure Index of change between 1995 and 2004 (1995=100, 2004 constant prices) Change in the number of students (in full-time equivalent) Israel Germany Italy1,2 Switzerland1,2 1. Public expenditure only. 2. Public institutions only. 3. Some levels of education are included with others. Norway1 Sweden United Kingdom Denmark3 Brazil1,2,3 Finland Czech Republic Japan3 Mexico Spain Netherlands Australia Portugal2 Hungary2 Chile Ireland Poland1,2 Greece1,3 United States B1.7a Slovak Republic3 Change in expenditure per student 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 Turkey1,2 Index of change (1995=100) 19 19 Teachers’ salaries (minimum, after 15 years experience, and maximum) in lower secondary education Annual statutorysalaries teachers’are salaries in public institutions lower Teacher a major influence onin spending secondary education, in equivalent USD converted using PPs, and levels. In Hungary low spending per student goes hand the ratio of salary 15 teacher years of experience to GDP persalaries capita in in hand with of low salaries. Statutory Equivalent USD converted using PPPs 100000 Hungary are the lowest of OECD countries and even when compared with per capita GDP, are low by OECD Salary after 15 years of experience/ minimum standards…. And this is after a doubling of teacher training salaries between 1996 and 2005 90000 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 Hungary Israel Mexico Czech Republic Iceland Slovenia Greece Sweden Italy Portugal France Norway New Zealand Finland Austria Denmark Belgium (Fr.) Belgium (Fl.) Spain England Australia Netherlands Ireland Japan Scotland Germany Korea United States D3.2 Switzerland 0 Luxembourg 20 20 21 21 Average class sizes and student to teacher ratios in primary education Students per class/teacher Average class size 25 Student-teacher ratio Although average class sizes are similar to OECD and EU averages at the primary level, there are more teachers employed in schools relative to the student numbers than in almost any other OECD country, raising questions about the efficiency of primary education in particular. 20 15 10 5 0 Hungary D2 OECD average EU19 average 22 22 Number of teaching hours per year, by level of education (2005) Net contact time in hours per year in public institutions The teaching load of teachers in Hungary isEU-19 below Hungary OECD average average average and particularly low for lower secondary teachers, where annual hours of teaching is 555 hours compared with the OECD average of 707 hours. Alongside this, the number of hours of instruction that students can expect to receive in Hungary are well below the OECD averages. Hours per year 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Primary education D4.2 Lower secondary education Upper secondary education, general programme 23 23 Influences on tertiary spending Index of change between 1995 2004 (1995=100, prices) Hungary rose byand 59% between 19952004 andconstant 2004 but a Index of change (1995=100) much faster Tertiary rise in student numbers (118%) meant education that Change Hungary was one of six countries in which in expenditure Change in the on numbertertiary of students (in full-time equivalent) per student fell expenditure education Change in expenditure per student between 1995 and 2004. 320 300 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 B1.7b 1. Public institutions only. 2. Some levels of education are included with others. 3. Public expenditure only. Czech Republic Hungary2 Brazil1,2,3 Poland1,2 Israel United Kingdom Portugal2 Sweden Australia Japan3 Netherlands Norway1 Chile Germany Mexico Finland Slovak Republic3 Austria Denmark3 Ireland Italy United States Switzerland1,2 Greece1 Spain 60 Turkey2 24 24 Changes in the number of students as well as changes in expenditure on educational institutions per student (1995,2004) At the tertiary level of education, expenditure in Share of private expenditure on educational institutions (1995, 2004) 25 25 Tertiary education Some countries have increasingly looked to private sources to help fund expansion of tertiary education. In more than one-half of the OECD countries and partner economies with comparable data in 1995 and 2004, the private share increased by 3 percentage points or more. At 21% the share of private funding in Hungary is below the OECD average of 24%. % B3.3c 26 26 Summary for Hungary Improvements are evident over time More and more qualified people in the population Expansion of tertiary education and increased participation at the secondary level Significant growth in expenditure on education including a sharp rise in teacher salaries 27 27 Main challenges for Hungary Tertiary education Potential for further expansion Sharing of costs between public and private sources should reflect the benefits gained Equity Improve higher education prospects for students from poorer socio-economic backgrounds Address large variations in performance between schools and sub-populations of students Efficiency Teacher demand and supply issues; efficient use of teacher resources 28 28 Thank you for listening ! www.oecd.org/edu/eag2007 www.pisa.oecd.org – All national and international publications – The complete micro-level database [email protected]