Radical openness is still a distant future in the field of school education. We have such a hard time figuring out that learning is not a place but an activity.
Radikalna otvorenost je i dalje daleka budućnost u polju obrazovanja. Imamo veliki problem shvatiti da učenje nije određeno mjesto nego aktivnost.
But I want to tell you the story of PISA, OECD's test to measure the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds around the world, and it's really a story of how international comparisons have globalized the field of education that we usually treat as an affair of domestic policy.
Želim vam ispričati priču PISA-e OECD-ovog testa kojim se mjere znanje i vještine petnaestogodišnjaka cijelog svijeta, priču o tome kako su međunarodne usporedbe globalizirale polje obrazovanja koje obično smatramo pitanjem unutarnje politike.
Look at how the world looked in the 1960s, in terms of the proportion of people who had completed high school. You can see the United States ahead of everyone else, and much of the economic success of the United States draws on its long-standing advantage as the first mover in education. But in the 1970s, some countries caught up. In the 1980s, the global expansion of the talent pool continued. And the world didn't stop in the 1990s. So in the '60s, the U.S. was first. In the '90s, it was 13th, and not because standards had fallen, but because they had risen so much faster elsewhere.
Pogledajte kako je svijet izgledao u 60-tima po pitanju omjera ljudi koji su završili srednju školu. Možete vidjeti Sjedinjene države ispred svih ostalih, a većina ekonomskog uspjeha Sjedinjenih država nastavlja se na dugoročnu prednost stečenu bivanjem prvima u obrazovanju. Ipak, u 70-tima, neke su se države počele približavati. U 80-ima, globalno širenje talenata se nastavilo. A svijet nije stao ni u 90-ima. Tako su SAD u 60-ima bile prve. U 90-ima su bile 13, ne zato što su njihovi standardi pali nego zato što su svuda drugdje porasli mnogo brže.
Korea shows you what's possible in education. Two generations ago, Korea had the standard of living of Afghanistan today, and was one of the lowest education performers. Today, every young Korean finishes high school.
Koreja pokazuje što je moguće u obrazovanju. Prije dvije generacije, Koreja je imala standard života današnjeg Afganistana, i bila je među najlošijima po pitanju edukacije. Danas, svaki mladi Korejanac završi srednju školu.
So this tells us that, in a global economy, it is no longer national improvement that's the benchmark for success, but the best performing education systems internationally. The trouble is that measuring how much time people spend in school or what degree they have got is not always a good way of seeing what they can actually do. Look at the toxic mix of unemployed graduates on our streets, while employers say they cannot find the people with the skills they need. And that tells you that better degrees don't automatically translate into better skills and better jobs and better lives.
Ovo nam govori da u globalnoj ekonomiji, mjerilo uspjeha više nije poboljšanje na nacionalnoj razini, nego međunarodna usporedba s najuspješnijim sustavima . Problem je u tome što mjerenje vremena provedenog u školi ili stečenog stupnja obrazovanja nije uvijek ispravan način da vidimo što oni stvarno mogu postići. Pogledajte samo netom diplomirane, a nezaposlene mlade na našim ulicama dok zaposlenici ne uspijevaju pronaći ljude sa znanjima koja su im potrebna. To vam govori da se viši stupanj obrazovanja ne preslikava automatski u važnije vještine, bolje poslove i kvalitetnije živote.
So with PISA, we try to change this by measuring the knowledge and skills of people directly. And we took a very special angle to this. We were less interested in whether students can simply reproduce what they have learned in school, but we wanted to test whether they can extrapolate from what they know and apply their knowledge in novel situations. Now, some people have criticized us for this. They say, you know, such a way of measuring outcomes is terribly unfair to people, because we test students with problems they haven't seen before. But if you take that logic, you know, you should consider life unfair, because the test of truth in life is not whether we can remember what we learned in school, but whether we are prepared for change, whether we are prepared for jobs that haven't been created, to use technologies that haven't been invented, to solve problems we just can't anticipate today.
PISA ovo pokušava promijeniti direktno mjereći znanja i vještine ljudi. Pri tome, zauzeli smo vrlo specifičan kut gledanja. Manje nas je zanimalo mogu li studenti jednostavno reproducirati što su naučili u školi - htjeli smo provjeriti mogu li iskoristiti ono što znaju i primijeniti svoje znanje u novim situacijama. Neki su nas zbog ovoga kritizirali. Kažu, znate, takav način mjerenja uspjeha je iznimno nepošten prema ljudima, jer učenike testiramo na problemima koje ranije nisu vidjeli. Ali, vodeći se tom logikom, znate, trebali bismo i život smatrati nepoštenim jer mjerilo uspjeha u životu nije možemo li se sjetiti što smo naučili u školi nego jesmo li pripremljeni za promjene, jesmo li pripremljeni za poslove koji još ne postoje, i korištenje tehnologija koje još nisu izmišljene da bismo riješili probleme koje trenutno ni ne zamišljamo.
And once hotly contested, our way of measuring outcomes has actually quickly become the standard. In our latest assessment in 2009, we measured 74 school systems that together cover 87 percent of the economy. This chart shows you the performance of countries. In red, sort of below OECD average. Yellow is so-so, and in green are the countries doing really well. You can see Shanghai, Korea, Singapore in Asia; Finland in Europe; Canada in North America doing really well. You can also see that there is a gap of almost three and a half school years between 15-year-olds in Shanghai and 15-year-olds in Chile, and the gap grows to seven school years when you include the countries with really poor performance. There's a world of difference in the way in which young people are prepared for today's economy.
Iako nekada osporavan na način mjerenja rezultata ubrzo je zapravo postao standard. U posljednjoj procjeni iz 2009. usporedili smo 74 obrazovna sustava koji zajedno pokrivaju 87 posto gospodarstva. Ovaj graf prikazuje performanse pojedini zemalja. Crvene, malo ispod prosjeka OECD-a. Žuto je tako-tako, a zeleno su države kojima ide jako dobro. Možete vidjeti kako Šangaj, Koreja i Singapur u Aziji; Finska u Europi; i Kanada u Sjevernoj Americi jako dobro stoje. Također, možete vidjeti da postoji razlika od gotovo tri i pol školske godine između petnaestogodišnjaka u Šangaju i u Čileu, a razlika raste do čak sedam školskih godina kada uključite zemlje sa zbilja slabim rezultatima. Postoji razlika svijetova između načina na koji su mladi ljudi pripremljeni za današnje gospodarstvo.
But I want to introduce a second important dimension into this picture. Educators like to talk about equity. With PISA, we wanted to measure how they actually deliver equity, in terms of ensuring that people from different social backgrounds have equal chances. And we see that in some countries, the impact of social background on learning outcomes is very, very strong. Opportunities are unequally distributed. A lot of potential of young children is wasted. We see in other countries that it matters much less into which social context you're born. We all want to be there, in the upper right quadrant, where performance is strong and learning opportunities are equally distributed. Nobody, and no country, can afford to be there, where performance is poor and there are large social disparities. And then we can debate, you know, is it better to be there, where performance is strong at the price of large disparities? Or do we want to focus on equity and accept mediocrity? But actually, if you look at how countries come out on this picture, you see there are a lot of countries that actually are combining excellence with equity. In fact, one of the most important lessons from this comparison is that you don't have to compromise equity to achieve excellence. These countries have moved on from providing excellence for just some to providing excellence for all, a very important lesson. And that also challenges the paradigms of many school systems that believe they are mainly there to sort people. And ever since those results came out, policymakers, educators, researchers from around the world have tried to figure out what's behind the success of those systems.
U ovu priču želim uvesti drugu važnu dimenziju. Svi uključeni u obrazovanje vole pričati o jednakosti. PISA-om smo htjeli izmjeriti koliko oni stvarno pružaju jednakost osiguravajući da ljudi iz različitih socijalnih poadina imaju iste prilike uspjeha. Vidimo da je u nekim državama utjecaj socijalnog okruženja na ishode učenja vrlo, vrlo snažan. Mogućnosti su neravnopravno raspodijeljene i mnogo potencijala mladih je potrošeno uzalud. Vidimo da je u nekim zemljama mnogo manje važno u kakvom socijalnom okruženju ste rođeni. Svi želimo biti ondje, u gornjem desnom kvadrantu gdje su mogućnosti jednako raspoređene, a rezultati su visoki. Nitko, niti jedna zemlja ne smije si dopustiti da bude ondje gdje su rezultati niski a postje i velike društvene razlike. Možda možemo raspravljati je li bolje biti ondje, gdje su rezultati visoki pod cijenu velikih razlika, ili se želimo fokusirati na jednakost i prihvatiti sredinu? Ali zapravo, ako pogledate kako države stoje na ovoj slici vidite da je mnogo zemalja koje kombiniraju izvrsnost s jednakošću. Zapravo, jedna od najvažnijih pouka ove usporedbe jest da ne moramo žrtvovati jednakost da bismo postigli izvrsnost. Ove države pomaknule su se od pružanja izvrsnosti samo nekima do pružanja izvrsnosti svima - vrlo važna pouka. Ovo, izaziva paradigme mnogih obrazovnih sustava koji vjeruju da postoje prvenstveno da bi razvrstale ljude. Od trenutka kad su ovi rezultati objavljeni, autori zakona, učitelji i istraživači iz cijelog svijeta pokušali su zaključiti što stoji iza uspjeha tih sustava.
But let's step back for a moment and focus on the countries that actually started PISA, and I'm giving them a colored bubble now. And I'm making the size of the bubble proportional to the amount of money that countries spent on students. If money would tell you everything about the quality of learning outcomes, you would find all the large bubbles at the top, no? But that's not what you see. Spending per student only explains about, well, less than 20 percent of the performance variation among countries, and Luxembourg, for example, the most expensive system, doesn't do particularly well. What you see is that two countries with similar spending achieve very different results. You also see -- and I think that's one of the most encouraging findings -- that we no longer live in a world that is neatly divided between rich and well-educated countries, and poor and badly-educated ones, a very, very important lesson.
Zastanimo na trenutak i fokusiramo se na zemlje koje su zapravo započele PISA-u, a trenutno su označene plavom bojojm. Postavio sam tako da je veličina kružića proporcionalna iznosu novca koje ove države ulažu u učenike. Kad bi nam novac mogao reći sve o jednakosti rezultata učenja, svi veliki kružići završili bi na vrhu, je li tako? Ali to nije ono što vidimo. Ulaganje po studentu objašnjava zapravo, manje od 20 posto varijance uspjeha među državama, a Luksemburg, na primjer, koji je najskuplji sustav ne postiže posebno dobre rezultate. Vidite da dvije države sa sličnom potrošnjom postižu vrlo različite rezultate. Također vidite - i mislim da je ovo među najohrabrujućim pronalascima da više ne živimo u svijetu koji je prigodno podijeljen između bogatih i visoko obrazovanih zemalja i siromašnih i nisko obrazovanih zemalja, što je vrlo, vrlo važna pouka.
Let's look at this in greater detail. The red dot shows you spending per student relative to a country's wealth. One way you can spend money is by paying teachers well, and you can see Korea investing a lot in attracting the best people into the teaching profession. And Korea also invests into long school days, which drives up costs further. Last but not least, Koreans want their teachers not only to teach but also to develop. They invest in professional development and collaboration and many other things. All that costs money. How can Korea afford all of this? The answer is, students in Korea learn in large classes. This is the blue bar which is driving costs down. You go to the next country on the list, Luxembourg, and you can see the red dot is exactly where it is for Korea, so Luxembourg spends the same per student as Korea does. But, you know, parents and teachers and policymakers in Luxembourg all like small classes. You know, it's very pleasant to walk into a small class. So they have invested all their money into there, and the blue bar, class size, is driving costs up. But even Luxembourg can spend its money only once, and the price for this is that teachers are not paid particularly well. Students don't have long hours of learning. And basically, teachers have little time to do anything else than teaching. So you can see two countries spent their money very differently, and actually how they spent their money matters a lot more than how much they invest in education.
Pogledajmo detalje. Crvena točka pokazuje potrošnju po studentu u omjeru s bogatstvom države. Novac možete potrošiti tako da dobro platite učitelje i možete vidjeti da Koreja ulaže mnogo kako bi privukla najbolje ljude u učiteljsku profesiju. Koreja također ulaže u duge školske dane, što dodatno povisuje troškove. Zadnje, ali ne najmanje važno, Korejanci ne žele da njihovi učitelji samo predaju nego i da se razvijaju. Investiraju u profesionalni razvoj, suradnju i mnoge druge stvari. Sve to košta mnogo novaca. Kako si Koreja može ovo priuštiti? Odgovor je: učenici u Koreji uče u velikim razredima. Ovo je plavi stupac koji snižava troškove. Idemo na sljedeću zemlju na listi, Luksemburg. Kao što možete vidjeti, crvena točkica je na istom mjestu kao i kod Koreje, tj. Luksemburg troši isti iznos po studentu kao Koreja. Ali, znate, roditelji, učitelji i političari u Luksemburgu svi vole male razrede. Znate, vrlo je ugodno ući u mali razred. I zato su sav novac uložili u male razrede, a plavi stupac povišuje troškove. Kao i svi, Luksemburg može novac potrošiti samo jednom, a cijena toga jest da učitelji nisu plaćeni naročito dobro. Učenici ne provode mnogo vremena u školi. U osnovi, učitelji nemaju dovoljno vremena za bilo što osim predavanja. Možete vidjeti da dvije države ulažu svoj novac vrlo različito, a način na koji ulažu svoj novac mnogo je važniji od iznosa koji ulažu u obrazovanje.
Let's go back to the year 2000. Remember, that was the year before the iPod was invented. This is how the world looked then in terms of PISA performance. The first thing you can see is that the bubbles were a lot smaller, no? We spent a lot less on education, about 35 percent less on education. So you ask yourself, if education has become so much more expensive, has it become so much better? And the bitter truth really is that, you know, not in many countries. But there are some countries which have seen impressive improvements. Germany, my own country, in the year 2000, featured in the lower quadrant, below average performance, large social disparities. And remember, Germany, we used to be one of those countries that comes out very well when you just count people who have degrees. Very disappointing results. People were stunned by the results. And for the very first time, the public debate in Germany was dominated for months by education, not tax, not other kinds of issues, but education was the center of the public debate. And then policymakers began to respond to this. The federal government dramatically raised its investment in education. A lot was done to increase the life chances of students with an immigrant background or from social disadvantage. And what's really interesting is that this wasn't just about optimizing existing policies, but data transformed some of the beliefs and paradigms underlying German education. For example, traditionally, the education of the very young children was seen as the business of families, and you would have cases where women were seen as neglecting their family responsibilities when they sent their children to kindergarten. PISA has transformed that debate, and pushed early childhood education right at the center of public policy in Germany. Or traditionally, the German education divides children at the age of 10, very young children, between those deemed to pursue careers of knowledge workers and those who would end up working for the knowledge workers, and that mainly along socioeconomic lines, and that paradigm is being challenged now too. A lot of change.
Vratimo se u 2000. godinu Sjetite se, to je godina dana prije nego je iPod izmišljen. U tom trenutku, svijet je ovako izgledao po pitanju PISA rezultata. Prva stvar koju vidite je da su kružići mnogo manji, zar ne? Trošili smo mnogo manje na obrazovanje, otprilike 35 posto manje. Zapitajte se, ako je obrazovanje postalo toliko skuplje, je li postalo toliko bolje? Gorka je istina da se to nije ostvarilo u mnogo zemalja. Ipak, postoje neke zemlje koje su svjedočile impresivnom razvoju. Njemačka, moja zemlja, u 2000. godini nalazila se u donjem kvadrantu, rezultati ispod prosjeka, velike socijalne nejednakosti. I sjetite se, Njemačka je bila jedna od onih zemalja čiji su rezultati vrlo visoki ako uzmemo samo ljude s fakuletotm Vrlo razočaravajući rezultati. Ljudi su bili šokirani rezultatima. I po prvi puta, javnom raspravom u Njemačkoj mjesecima je dominiralo obrazovanje, ne porezi ili ostala pitanja. Edukacija je bila u središtu javne rasprave. Tada su su političari počeli reagirati na ovo pitanje. Federalna vlada dramatično je povećala ulaganje u obrazovanje. Mnogo je učinjeno kako bi se povećale šanse studenata imigranata ili onih s lošim socijalnim statusom. Zbilja je zanimljivo to da se ovdje nije radilo samo o optimiziranju postojećih zakona nego su podaci transformirali neka uvjerenja i paradigme na kojima je ležao njemački obrazovni sustav. Na primjer, tradicionalno je obrazovanje vrlo mlade djece bilo smatrano zadaćom obitelji, a bilo je slučajeva kad je smatrano da žene zanemaruju svoje obiteljske obaveze zbog slanja djece u vrtić. PISA je preobrazila ovu debatu i postavila obrazovanje u ranom djetinjstvu u samo središte javne rasprave u Njemačkoj. Ili tradicionalno, njemački obrazovni sustav dijeli djecu staru 10 godina, vrlo mladu djecu, između onih kojima je suđeno nastaviti karijere kao visokoobrazovani i onih koji će na kraju raditi za visokoobrazovane, a ova podjela temelji se prvenstveno na socioekonomskim značajkama, ali se i ova paradigma trenutno preispituje. Mnogo promjena.
And the good news is, nine years later, you can see improvements in quality and equity. People have taken up the challenge, done something about it.
Ali dobre vijesti su da, devet godina kasnije, možete vidjeti poboljašanja u kvaliteti i jednakosti. Ljudi su prihvatili izazov i učinili nešto po tom pitanju.
Or take Korea, at the other end of the spectrum. In the year 2000, Korea did already very well, but the Koreans were concerned that only a small share of their students achieved the really high levels of excellence. They took up the challenge, and Korea was able to double the proportion of students achieving excellence in one decade in the field of reading. Well, if you only focus on your brightest students, you know what happens is disparities grow, and you can see this bubble moving slightly to the other direction, but still, an impressive improvement.
Ili uzmite Koreju, na drugom kraju spektra. U 2000. godini, Koreja je stajala vrlo dobro, ali su Korejanci bili zabrinuti da samo mali dio njihovih studenata postiže zbilja visoke nivoe izvrsnosti. Prihvatili su izazov, i Koreja je u jedno desetljaće uspjela poduplati omjer studenata koji postižu iznimne rezulate u području čitanja. Dakle, ako se usmjerite samo na najbistrije učenike, znate da nejednakosti rastu i možete vidjeti kako se ovaj mjehur blago pomiče u jednu stranu ali svejedno, impresivno poboljšanje.
A major overhaul of Poland's education helped to dramatically reduce between variability among schools, turn around many of the lowest-performing schools, and raise performance by over half a school year. And you can see other countries as well. Portugal was able to consolidate its fragmented school system, raise quality and improve equity, and so did Hungary.
Značajno restrukturiranje poljskog obrazovanja pomoglo je značajno smanjiti razlike između škola, preokrenuti mnoge od škola s najlošijim rezultatima i podići rezultate za više od pola školske godine. A možete vidjeti i ostale zemlje. Portugl je uspio složiti svoj rascjepkani obrazovni sustav, podići kvalitetu i pojačati jednakost, kao što je uspjela i Mađarska.
So what you can actually see, there's been a lot of change. And even those people who complain and say that the relative standing of countries on something like PISA is just an artifact of culture, of economic factors, of social issues, of homogeneity of societies, and so on, these people must now concede that education improvement is possible. You know, Poland hasn't changed its culture. It didn't change its economy. It didn't change the compositions of its population. It didn't fire its teachers. It changed its education policies and practice. Very impressive.
Zapravo, možete vidjeti da je bilo mnogo promjena. Iako čak i ljudi koji se žale i kažu da je relativan poredak zemalja ili nešto slično PISA-i zapravo artifakt kulture ili ekonomskih faktora ili socijalnih prilika, ili homogenosti društava itd čak i ovi ljudi moraju prihvatiti da je poboljšanje obrazovanja moguće. Znate, Poljska nije promjenila svoju kulturu. Nije promijenila svoju ekonomiju. Nije promjenila sastav populacije. Nije otpustila učitelje. Promijenila je obrazovne zakone i prakse. Vrlo impresivno.
And all that raises, of course, the question: What can we learn from those countries in the green quadrant who have achieved high levels of equity, high levels of performance, and raised outcomes? And, of course, the question is, can what works in one context provide a model elsewhere? Of course, you can't copy and paste education systems wholesale, but these comparisons have identified a range of factors that high-performing systems share. Everybody agrees that education is important. Everybody says that. But the test of truth is, how do you weigh that priority against other priorities? How do countries pay their teachers relative to other highly skilled workers? Would you want your child to become a teacher rather than a lawyer? How do the media talk about schools and teachers? Those are the critical questions, and what we have learned from PISA is that, in high-performing education systems, the leaders have convinced their citizens to make choices that value education, their future, more than consumption today. And you know what's interesting? You won't believe it, but there are countries in which the most attractive place to be is not the shopping center but the school. Those things really exist.
A sve ovo postavlja, naravno, pitanje: što možemo naučiti iz zemalja u zelenom kvadrantu koje su postigle visoki nivo jednakosti, ali i razine uspješnosti? I, naravno, postavlja se pitanje može li ono što funkcionira u jednom okruženju biti uspješno preslikano drugdje? Naravno, ne možemo preslikati obrazovne sustave u cjelini, ali ove usporedbe identificirale su spektar faktora koje uspješni sustavi dijele. Svi se slažemo da je obrazovanje važno. Svi to govore. Ali važno pitanje jest, koliko cijenimo ovaj u odnosu na ostale prioritete? Koliko države plaćaju svoje učitelje u odnosu na ostale visokoobrazovane radnike? Biste li željeli da vaše dijete postane učitelj radije nego odvjetnik? Kako mediji govore o školama i učiteljima? Ovo su ključna pitanja, a iz PISA-e smo naučili da u iznimno uspješnim sustavima, čelni ljudi su uspješli uvjeriti građane da čine odluke koje cijene obrazovanje, kao njihovu budućnost, više nego današnju potrošnju. Znate li što je zanimljivo? Neće vjerovati, ali postoje zemlje u kojima najatraktivnije mjesto nije biti u trgovačkom centru nego u školu. Takve stvari zbilja postoje.
But placing a high value on education is just part of the picture. The other part is the belief that all children are capable of success. You have some countries where students are segregated early in their ages. You know, students are divided up, reflecting the belief that only some children can achieve world-class standards. But usually that is linked to very strong social disparities. If you go to Japan in Asia, or Finland in Europe, parents and teachers in those countries expect every student to succeed, and you can see that actually mirrored in student behavior. When we asked students what counts for success in mathematics, students in North America would typically tell us, you know, it's all about talent. If I'm not born as a genius in math, I'd better study something else. Nine out of 10 Japanese students say that it depends on my own investment, on my own effort, and that tells you a lot about the system that is around them.
Ali pridavanje visoke važnosti obrazovanju je samo dio ukupne slike. Drugi dio je vjerovanje da su sva djeca sposobna za uspjeh. Postoje zemlje gdje su učenici razdvojeni vrlo rano u životu. Znate, učenici su podijeljeni, što odražava vjerovanje da neka djeca mogu postići svjetske uspjehe. Ali to je najčešće povezano s vrlo snažnim društvenim nejednakostima. Odete li u Japan u Aziji ili Finsku u Europi roditelji i djeca u tim zemljama očekuju da svaki učenik uspije, što se zaista može vidjeti i u ponašanju učenika. Kada ih se pita što je važno za uspjeh u matematici, učenici u Sjevernoj Americi obično kažu znate, sve je to talent. Ako nisam rođen kao genijalac za matematiku, bolje da učim nešto drugo. Devet od deset japanskih studenata kaže da to ovisi o njihovom ulaganju i trudu, a to vam mnogo kaže o sustavu koji ih okružuje.
In the past, different students were taught in similar ways. High performers on PISA embrace diversity with differentiated pedagogical practices. They realize that ordinary students have extraordinary talents, and they personalize learning opportunities.
U prošlosti, različiti studenti podučavani su na slične načine. Sustavi koji su uspješni na PISA-i prihvaćaju različitost prilagođujući pedagoške prakse. Shvaćaju da obični studenti imaju izvanredne talente i personaliziraju prilike za učenje.
High-performing systems also share clear and ambitious standards across the entire spectrum. Every student knows what matters. Every student knows what's required to be successful.
Vrlo uspješni sustavi također dijele jasne i ambiciozne standarde u svim dijelovima. Svaki student zna što je važno. Svaki student zna što je potrebno da bi bio uspješan.
And nowhere does the quality of an education system exceed the quality of its teachers. High-performing systems are very careful in how they recruit and select their teachers and how they train them. They watch how they improve the performances of teachers in difficulties who are struggling, and how they structure teacher pay. They provide an environment also in which teachers work together to frame good practice. And they provide intelligent pathways for teachers to grow in their careers. In bureaucratic school systems, teachers are often left alone in classrooms with a lot of prescription on what they should be teaching. High-performing systems are very clear what good performance is. They set very ambitious standards, but then they enable their teachers to figure out, what do I need to teach to my students today? The past was about delivered wisdom in education. Now the challenge is to enable user-generated wisdom. High performers have moved on from professional or from administrative forms of accountability and control -- sort of, how do you check whether people do what they're supposed to do in education -- to professional forms of work organization. They enable their teachers to make innovations in pedagogy. They provide them with the kind of development they need to develop stronger pedagogical practices. The goal of the past was standardization and compliance. High-performing systems have made teachers and school principals inventive. In the past, the policy focus was on outcomes, on provision. The high-performing systems have helped teachers and school principals to look outwards to the next teacher, the next school around their lives.
I nigdje kvaliteta obrazovnog sustava ne premašuje kvalitetu svojih učitelja. Vrlo uspješni sustavi su iznimno oprezni u tome kako regrutiraju i odabiru svoje učitelje i kako ih obučavaju. Obraćaju pažnju na poboljšanje performansi učitelja koji se bore s problemima i na to kako strukturiraju njihovu plaću. Također, pružaju okruženje u kojem učitelji rade zajedno kako bi pronašli najbolje pristupe i pružaju inteligentne smjernice za rast učitelja u njihovim karijerama. U birokratskim školskim sustavima učitelji su često prepušteni sami sebi u učionicama s mnogo uputa o tome što bi morali podučavati. U vrlo uspješnim sustavima, jasno je što je visok uspjeh. Oni postavljaju ambiciozne standarde, ali omogućavaju učiteljima da sami shvate što je učenike danas potrebno naučiti? Obrazovanje se prije temeljilo na "isporučenoj" mudrosti. Danas je izazov omogućiti korisnicima stvaranje mudrosti. Uspješni sustavi su se odmaknuli od administrativnih oblika odgovornosti i kontrole - recimo, kako provjeriti rade li ljudi ono što je njihova zadaća u obrazovanju? - prema profesionalnim oblicima organizacije rada. Omogućuju učiteljima da unose inovacije u pedagogiju. Opskrbljuju ih oblicima razvoja koji su im potrebni kako bi razvili uspješnije pedagoške metode. Cilj je u prošlosti bila standardizacija i posluh. Vrlo uspješni sustavi napravili su učitelje i ravnatelje škola inovativnima. U prošlosti, fokus propisa bio je na rezultatima, na dodjeljivanju sredstava. Vrlo uspješni sustavi pomogli su učiteljima i ravnateljima da gledaju prema van, prema ostalim učiteljima i školama u njihovom životu.
And the most impressive outcomes of world-class systems is that they achieve high performance across the entire system. You've seen Finland doing so well on PISA, but what makes Finland so impressive is that only five percent of the performance variation amongst students lies between schools. Every school succeeds. This is where success is systemic. And how do they do that? They invest resources where they can make the most difference. They attract the strongest principals into the toughest schools, and the most talented teachers into the most challenging classroom.
A najimpresivnije postignuće vrhunskih svjetskih sustava je taj što oni postižu visoke rezultate duž cijelog sustava. Vidjeli ste da Finska odlično stoji na PISA-i, ali on što Finsku čini tako impresivno je da samo pet posto varijacija u uspješnosti studenata leži među školama. Svaka škola uspjeva. To je sistemski uspjeh. A kako to uspjevaju? Ulažu resurse tamo gdje oni mogu napraviti najveću razliku. Privlače najbolje ravnatelje u najtvrđe škole, a najtalentiranije učitelje u najizazovnije razrede.
Last but not least, those countries align policies across all areas of public policy. They make them coherent over sustained periods of time, and they ensure that what they do is consistently implemented.
I zadnje, ali ne i najmanje važno, ove države usklađuju svoje ciljeve kroz sva područja javne politike. Čine ih koherentnim kroz dugačke periode vremena, i osiguraju da se isti konzistentno implementiraju.
Now, knowing what successful systems are doing doesn't yet tell us how to improve. That's also clear, and that's where some of the limits of international comparisons of PISA are. That's where other forms of research need to kick in, and that's also why PISA doesn't venture into telling countries what they should be doing. But its strength lies in telling them what everybody else has been doing. And the example of PISA shows that data can be more powerful than administrative control of financial subsidy through which we usually run education systems.
Ipak, znajući što uspješni sustavi čine ne govori nam još kako se poboljšati. To je također jasno, i tu leže neka od ograničenja međunarodnih PISA-inih usporedbi. Ovo je mjesto gdje drugi oblici istraživanja trebaju uskočiti, a to je i razlog zašto PISA ne zalazi u govorenje zemljama što trebaju raditi. Njena snaga leži u govorenju što svi ostali rade. A primjer PISA-e govori da podaci mogu biti mnogo važniji od administrativne kontrole financijskih poticaja kroz koje obično vodimo obrazovne sustave.
You know, some people argue that changing educational administration is like moving graveyards. You just can't rely on the people out there to help you with this. (Laughter) But PISA has shown what's possible in education. It has helped countries to see that improvement is possible. It has taken away excuses from those who are complacent. And it has helped countries to set meaningful targets in terms of measurable goals achieved by the world's leaders. If we can help every child, every teacher, every school, every principal, every parent see what improvement is possible, that only the sky is the limit to education improvement, we have laid the foundations for better policies and better lives.
Znate, neki ljudi argumentiraju da je mijenjanje obrazovne administarcije kao seljenje groblja. Jednostavno se ne možete pouzdati u ljude koji se tamo nalaze. (Smjeh) Ali PISA je pokazala što je moguće u obrazovanju. Pomogla je zemljama shvatiti da je poboljšanje moguće. Oduzela je izgovore onima koji su zadovoljni postojećim. I pomogla je zemljama postaviti smislene izazove u obliku mjerljivih ciljeva koje svjetski predvodnici postižu. Ako možemo pomoći svakam djetetu, svakom učitelju, svakoj školi, svakom razvnatelju i svakom roditelju kakav je napredak moguć i da je samo nebo granica u poboljšanju obrazovanja, postavili smo temelje boljim zakonima i boljim životima.
Thank you.
Hvala vam
(Applause)
(Pljesak)