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 još uvek u dalekoj budućnosti na polju obrazovanja. Teško nam je da shvatimo da učenje nije mesto već 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 da vam ispričam priču o PISA projektu, to je test kojim OECD meri znanje i veštine petnaestogotišnjaka širom sveta, to je u stvari priča o tome kako međunarodnim upoređivanjem globalizujemo polje obrazovanja što obično smatramo problemom lokalne 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 svet izgledao 1960-ih, u smislu procenta ljudi koji su završili srednju školu. Vidite da su Sjedinjene Države ispred svih i veliki deo ekonomskog uspeha Sjedinjenih Država proizlazi iz njene dugoročne prednosti kao prvaka u obrazovanju. Ali u '70-im, neke zemlje su je sustigle. '80-ih, globalno širenje talenata se nastavilo. A svet se nije zaustavio ni u '90-im. Dakle, '60-ih, SAD su bile prve. u '90-im su bile trinaeste i ne zato što je standard opao, već zato što je porastao mnogo brže na svim drugim mestima.
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 vam pokazuje mogućnosti u obrazovanju. Pre dve generacije Koreja je imala životni standard današnjeg Avganistana i bila je jedna od država sa najviše neobrazovanih ljudi. 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, nacionalni razvoj više nije merilo uspeha, već internacionalno najuspešniji obrazovni sistem. Problem je što merenjem koliko vremena ljudi provedu u školi ili koju diplomu imaju, nije uvek dobar pokazatelj onoga što oni zapravo umeju da rade. Pogledajte štetnu mešavinu nezaposlenih diplomaca na ulicama, dok poslodavci govore kako ne mogu da nađu ljude sa neophodnim veštinama. To nam govori da bolje diplome ne znače nužno da ćete imati bolje veštine, bolji posao i bolji život.
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 testom, pokušavamo da promenimo ovo direktnim merenjem znanja i veština kod ljudi. Posmatramo ovo iz posebnog ugla. Manje nas je zanimala sposobnost studenata da prosto reprodukuju šta su naučili u školi, hteli smo da proverimo da li oni umeju da iskoriste ono što znaju i da primene svoje znanje u novim situacijama. Sada, neki ljudi su protiv ovoga. Kažu, znate, takav način merenja uspeha nije pošten prema ljudima, jer mi testiramo učenike na problemima koje nisu ranije videli. Ali vodeći se tom logikom, znate, vi govorite da je život nepošten, zato što merilo uspeha u životu nije mogućnost da se setimo šta smo naučili u školi, već da li smo spremni za promene, da li smo spremni za poslove koji još ne postoje, za tehnologiju koja još uvek nije izmišljena, za probleme koje danas ne možemo da predvidimo.
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.
Nekada je bio oštro osporavan, a naš način merenja uspeha ubrzo je postao standard. U našoj poslednjoj proceni 2009. testirali smo 74 školska sistema koji zajedno pokrivaju 87 posto ekonomije. Ovaj grafikon pokazuje uspeh nekih zemalja. Crveno, nekako ispod OECD proseka. Žuto je osrednje, a zeleno su države kojima ide jako dobro. Vidite da Šangaj, Koreja, Singapur u Aziji, Finska u Evropi, Kanada u Severnoj Americi dobro napreduju. Isto tako možete da vidite da postoji razlika od gotovo tri ipo školske godine između Šangajskih i Čileanskih petnaestogodišnjaka, a razlika raste i do sedam školskih godina kada uključimo zemlje sa vrlo lošim rezultatima. Na neki način, postoji mnogo razlika u načinu pripremanja mladih za današnju ekonomiju.
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.
Želim da uvedem i drugu važnu dimenziju u ovu priču. Nastavnici vole da govore o jednakosti. PISA testom smo hteli da izmerimo koliko jednakosti oni pružaju brinući pri tom da ljudi iz različitih društvenih slojeva imaju iste prilike za uspeh. Vidimo da je u nekim zemljama uticaj društvenih slojeva na rezultate školovanja veoma, veoma snažan. Mogućnosti nisu jednako podeljene. Mnogo potencijala kod mladih ljudi je uzalud potrošeno. Vidimo da je u drugim zemljama manje važno iz kog društvenog sloja potičete. Svi mi želimo da budemo ovde, u gornjem desnom uglu, gde su rezultati dobri, a prilike za učenje jednako raspodeljene. Niko, nijedna zemlja ne sme da dozvoli da bude tamo, gde je učinak loš i gde postoje velike socijalne nejednakosti. A onda možemo da raspravljamo, znate, da li je bolje biti tamo, gde su rezultati dobri po cenu velike nejednakosti? Ili ćemo se fokusirati na jednakost i prihvatiti osrednjost? Ali ustvari, ako pogledate kako države izgledaju na ovoj slici videćete da ima dosta zemalja koje zapravo kombinuju savršenstvo sa jednakošću. U stvari, jedna od najvažnijih lekcija ovog upoređivanja je da ne morate da ugrozite jednakost da biste postigli savršenstvo. Ove zemlje su se pomakle od pružanja savršenstva samo nekima do pružanja savršenstva svima, a to je vrlo važna lekcija. A to takođe osporava organizaciju mnogih obrazovnih sistema koji veruju da postoje prvenstveno da bi razvrstavali ljude. Od kada su se ti rezultati pojavili, zakonodavci, profesori, istraživači sa svih strana sveta pokušavaju da shvate šta stoji iza uspeha tih školskih sistema.
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.
Ali hajde da se vratimo na trenutak i fokusiramo se na zemlje koje su uvele PISA testove, označiću ih obojenim kružićima. Postaviću ih tako da veličina kružića odgovara količini novca koji ta zemlja potroši na đake. Kada bi novac govorio sve o kvalitetu rezultata učenja, svi veliki krugovi bi se našli na vrhu, zar ne? Ali to nije ono što vidite. Ukupna potrošnja po studentu objašnjava, pa, manje od 20 posto varijacije u uspehu kod različitih zemalja, Luksemburg, na primer, najskuplji sistem ne postiže posebno dobre rezultate. Kao što vidite, dve zemlje sa sličnom potrošnjom postižu potpuno različite rezultate. Takođe vidite - i mislim da je to zaključak koji ohrabruje - da više ne živimo u svetu koji je precizno podeljen na bogate zemlje sa visokim obrazovanjem i siromašne sa niskim obrazovanjem, vrlo, vrlo važna lekcija.
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.
Hajde da detaljno pogledamo ovo. Crvena tačka pokazuje potrošnju po studentu u odnosu na bogatstvo zemlje. Jedan način da potrošite novac je da dobro platite nastavnike i vidite da Koreja dosta investira u zapošljavanje najboljih ljudi u obrazovanju. Koreja takođe ulaže u duge školske dane, što još više povećava trošak. I na kraju, Korejanci traže od svojih nastavnika ne samo da podučavaju, već i da napreduju. Oni ulažu u profesionalni razvoj i saradnju i mnoge druge stvari. Sve to košta. Kako Koreja može sve ovo da priušti? Odgovor je, studenti u Koreji uče u velikim grupama. Ovo je plava linija koja obara troškove. Idemo na sledeću državu na spisku, Luksemburg, vidite da crvena tačka zauzima isto mesto kao kod Koreje, dakle, Luksemburg po studentu troši isto koliko i Koreja. Ali, znate, roditelji i nastavnici i zakonodavci u Luksemburgu vole male grupe učenika. Znate, vrlo je prijatno ući u mali razred. Oni su sav svoj novac uložili u to, a plava linija, broj učenika, povećava trošak. Ali čak i Luksemburg može da potroši sav svoj novac odjednom, a cena je da nastavnici nisu dovoljno dobro plaćemi. Učenici ne provode dosta vremena u školi. U principu, nastavnici imaju malo vremena za bilo šta osim za predavanje. Vidite da ove dve države troše svoj novac vrlo različito. I zapravo, način na koji troše svoj novac je mnogo važniji od toga koliko 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.
Hajde da se vratimo u 2000. godinu. Sećate se da je to godina pre izlaska ajpoda. Ovako je svet tada izgledao po pitanju PISA rezultata. Prva stvar koju vidite je da su kružići bili mnogo manji, zar ne? Mnogo manje smo ulagali u obrazovanje, oko 35 posto manje. Pitate se, ako je obrazovanje postalo skuplje da li je postalo i bolje? A gorka istina je, znate, da nije, u mnogim zemljama. Ali ima nekih zemalja koje su postigle veliki napredak. Nemačka, moja zemlja, se 2000. godine nalazila u donjem kvadratu, rezultat ispod proseka, velike socijalne razlike. Setite se da je Nemačka bila jedna od onih zemalja sa jako dobrim rezultatom kada prebrojite koliko ljudi ima diplomu. Veoma razočaravajući rezultati. Ljudi su bili zatečeni rezultatima. I po prvi put, javnom raspravom u Nemačkoj mesecima je dominiralo obrazovanje, ne porezi, ne drugi problemi, već je obrazovanje bilo srž javnih rasprava. Tada su političari počeli da reaguju na ovo pitanje. Vlada je dramatično povećala svoja ulaganja u obrazovanje. Mnogo toga je urađeno da bi se poboljšale šanse za uspeh studenata iz imigrantskih porodica ili lošeg socijanog statusa. A najinteresantije je to što se ovo ne odnosi samo na poboljšavanje već postojeće politike, podaci su uticali na neka uverenja i paradigme u korenu nemačkog obrazovanja. Na primer, tradiconalno se obrazovanje male dece posmatralo kao posao porodice, i bio je slučajeva gde su kritikovali žene zbog zanemarivanja porodičnih obaveza kada pošalju svoju decu u obdanište. PISA je preokrenula tu debatu, i nametnula obrazovanje u ranom detinjstvu u samo središte javne politike u Nemačkoj. Ili tradicionalno, nemački obrazovni sistem deli decu kada imaju 10 godina, veoma malu decu, na one koji će graditi karijeru kao visokoobrazovani i one koji će raditi za visokoobrazovane, i to uglavnom po društveno-ekonomskim standardima, a taj obrazac takođe osporavamo. Mnogo promena.
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.
A dobra vest je da, devet godina kasnije, možete videti poboljšanje u kvalitetu i u jednakosti. Ljudi su prihvatili izazov, uradili 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. 2000. godine, Koreja je imala vrlo dobar položaj, ali Korejanci su bili zabrinuti da samo mali deo njihovih studenata postiže jako visok nivo uspeha. Prihvatili su izazov, i Koreja je za jednu deceniju duplirala broj studenata sa odličnim rezultatima u području čitanja. Pa, ako se usmerite samo na bistre studente, znate šta se događa, nejednakost raste i vidite da se ovaj kružić pomera malo u suprotnom pravcu, ali ipak, upečatljiv pomak.
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.
Velika rekonstrukcija poljskog obrazovnog sistema drastično je uticala na smanjivanje razlika među školama, na napredak mnogih škola sa lošim rezultatima, na podizanje rezultata za više od pola školske godine. A možete da vidite i druge zemlje. Portugal je uspeo da pomiri svoj podeljeni obrazovni sistem, poboljša kvalitet i popravi jednakost, a to je učinila 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.
Kao što možete da vidite, došlo je do puno promena. Pa čak i oni ljudi koji se ne slažu i kažu da je relativni položaj zemalja prema nečemu kao PISA samo proizvod kulture, ekonomskih faktora, društvenih problema ili homogenosti društva, oni sada moraju da priznaju da je moguće unaprediti obrazovanje. Znate, Poljska nije promenila svoju kulturu. Nije promenila svoju ekonomiju. Nije promenila sastav svoje populacije. Nije otpustila svoje nastavnike. Promenila je svoju obrazovnu politiku i praksu. Veoma 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 to, naravno, poteže jedno pitanje: šta možemo da naučimo od ovih zemalja u zelenom uglu koje su postigle visok nivo jednakosti, visok nivo učinka i poboljšale rezultate? I naravno, pitanje je, može li nešto što funkcioniše u jednom kontekstu da posluži kao model u nekom drugom? Naravno, ne možete preslikati ceo obrazovni sistem, ali ovo upoređivanje je istaklo spektar faktora koje imaju uspešni sistemi. Svi se slažu da je obrazovanje važno. Svako će reći da je tako. Ali važno pitanje je, koliko vrednujete taj prioritet u odnosu na druge prioritete? Koliko države plaćaju svoje nastavnike u odnosu na ostale visokokvalifikovane radnike? Da li biste želeli da vaše dete postane nastavnik, a ne advokat? Kako mediji prikazuju škole i nastavnike? To su ključna pitanja, a od PISA projekta smo naučili da je kod uspešnih obrazovnih sistemima vlast ubedila svoje građane da donesu odluke koje vrednuju obrazovanje, njihovu budućnost, više od današnje potrošnje. Znate li šta je zanimljivo? Nećete verovati, ali postoje države gde najprivlačnije mesto nije tržni centar nego škola. To stvarno postoji.
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 veliki značaj obrazovanja je samo jedan deo priče. Drugi deo je verovanje da su sva deca sposobna za uspeh. Imate neke zemlje gde su učenici diskriminisani od najranijeg doba. Učenici su podeljeni na osnovu uverenja da samo neka deca mogu da dostignu svetske standarde. To se često vezuje za veoma jake socijalne nejednakosti. Ako odete u Japan u Aziji ili Finsku u Evropi, roditelji i nastavnici u tim zemljama očekuju uspeh od svakog učenika, možete primetiti da se to vidi u ponašanju učenika. Kada smo pitali učenike šta znači biti uspešan u matematici, učenici u Severnoj Americi bi nam obično odgovorili, znate, da je u pitanju talenat. Ako se ne rodim kao matematički genije, bolje da učim nešto drugo. Devet od deset učenika u Japanu kažu da to zavisi od ličnih ulaganja, od sopstvenog truda, a to govori dosta o sistemu u kome se nalaze.
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 učenici su učili na isti način. Visoko rangirani po PISA testovima prihvataju raznolikost različitim pedagoškim pristupima. Oni shvataju da obični učenici imaju izvanredne talente i oni personalizuju mogućnosti 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.
Uspešni sistemi takođe dele jasne ambiciozne standarde u svim delovima. Svaki učenik zna šta je važno. Svaki učenik zna šta je potrebno za uspeh.
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 nigde kvalitet obrazovnog sistema ne prevazilazi kvalitet nastavnika. Uspešni školski sistemi su veoma oprezni u izboru i zapošljavanju svojih nastavnika i njihovom usavršavanju. Oni vode računa o tome kako napreduje rad nastavnika kako se snalaze u teškim okolnostima, i kako će odrediti visinu njihove plate. Takođe, pružaju okruženje u kome će nastavnici raditi zajedno na stvaranju najboljeg pristupa. Mudro usmeravaju svoje nastavnike da ostvare napredak u svojoj karijeri. U birokratskim školskim sistemima, nastavnici su često prepušteni sami sebi sa gomilom pravila o tome kako bi trebalo da predaju. U uspešnim sistemima je vrlo jasno šta je dobar uspeh. Standard je veoma ambiciozno postavljen, ali omogućava nastavnicima da sami shvate, šta treba da nauče svoje učenike danas. Obrazovanje se u prošlosti svodilo na prenošenje mudrosti. Sada je izazov omogućiti mudrost koja se stiče. Uspešni sistemi su se pomakli sa administrativnih oblika odgovornosti i kontrole - na neki način, kako da proverite da li ljudi rade ono što treba da rade u obrazovanju - prema profesionalnim oblicima organizacije rada. Pružaju mogućnost nastavnicima da budu inovativni kao pedagozi. Pružaju im, na neki način, razvoj koji im je potreban da bi stvorili jaku pedagošku praksu. U prošlosti, cilj se svodio na standardizaciju i poslušnost. Uspešni sistemi su učinili nastavnike i direktore škola preduzimljivim. U prošlosti, fokus politike je bio na rezultatima, na raspodeli sredstava. Uspešni sistemi su pomogli nastavnicima i direktorima škola da gledaju napred prema ostalim nastavnicima 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.
Najimpresivnije dostignuće svetskih školskih sistema jeste da oni postižu dobre rezultate na nivou celog sistema. Videli smo da Finska dobro rangira prema PISA testovima, ali ono što Finsku čini toliko posebnom je da rezultati među njenim školama variraju za samo pet posto. Svaka škola postiže uspeh. Uspeh postaje deo sistema. A kako to postižu? Oni investiraju u ono na šta mogu najviše da utiču. Postavljaju najbolje direktore u najteže škole i najtalentovanije nastavnike u najizazovnija odeljenja.
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 poslednje, ali ne i najmanje važno, ove države usklađuju svoje ciljeve u svim aspektima javne politike. Čine ih koherentnim kroz dugačke vremenske periode i staraju se da se isti dosledno 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.
To što znamo kako uspešni sistemi funkcionišu nam ne govori kako da unapredimo svoj. To je takođe jasno i ovo predstavlja ograničenje međunarodnog upoređivanja PISA projekta. Tu treba da uskoče ostali oblici istraživanja i zbog toga PISA ne pokušava da govori državama kako da posluju. Ali snaga ovog projekta leži u tome što govori kako svi ostali posluju. PISA primer pokazuje da podaci mogu biti uticajniji od novčanih sredstava po kojima obično upravljamo obrazovnim sistemima.
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 ljude tvrde da je menjanje obrazovne administracije kao premeštanje grobova. Prosto ne možete da očekujete pomoć od ljudi koji su u njima. (Smeh) Ali PISA je pokazala koje su mogućnosti obrazovanja. Omogućila je državama da vide da je napredak moguć. Oduzela je mogućnost izgovora onima koji su popustljivi. Omogućila je državama da ciljaju ka onome što postižu svetski lideri u ovoj oblasti. Kada bismo mogli da pomognemo svakom detetu, nastavniku, školi, svakom direktoru, svakom roditelju da vidi kakav napredak je moguć i da je samo nebo granica u poboljšanju obrazovanja, postavili bismo temelj za bolju politiku i bolje živote.
Thank you.
Hvala.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)