EN    EN EN 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 3.7.2008 
SEC(2008) 2177 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
 
accompanying the 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE CO MMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMI TTEE OF THE REGIONS 
 
Improving competences for the 21st Century:  
An Agenda for European Cooperation on Schools 
{COM(2008) 425 final} 
EN 2   EN INTRODUCTION   
This staff working document complements th e Communication ‘Competences for the 21st 
Century: An Agenda for European Cooperati on on Schools’ (COM(2008) 425). It presents (a) 
a summary of the results of the public consultation, as well as  (b) the theoretical and empirical 
evidence underlying the Communication.  
A. RESULTS  OF THE  PUBLIC  CONSULTATION  ON  SCHOOLS 
1. Introduction 
In July 2007, the European Commission launche d a public consultation entitled "Schools for 
the 21st Century"1, largely based on evidence collected through its previous  work under the 
Open Method of Coordination, as well as on the most up-to-date research in this field. The 
consultation was open for five months until 15th December 2007. 
The public consultation was designe d to involve stakeholders in present and future European 
debates concerning school educ ation; however, it di d not present a proposed policy on which 
views were sought. On the contrary, it sought to involve participants in the development of 
future cooperation work by seeking their views on some important aspects of school 
education and on future challenge s and possible solutions. Opinions  were sought in particular 
on what the added value of European cooperatio n could be in addres sing common challenges, 
while respecting the princi ple of subsidiarity and Member State competences. 
Because of the very nature of the subject – schoo l education being very close to the daily life 
of citizens across the Union – a public consultation on schools could not limit itself to the 
formal stakeholder organisations in  this field, at European or at national level. It needed also 
to be open to individuals – teachers, pupils, parent s or simply citizens with an interest in this 
aspect of our societies. Decision-makers at nati onal, regional or local level were of course 
also addressed by the consultation. 
The final result was a significantly varied collec tion of responses, ranging from the insight of 
the individual teacher to the reform plans of national policy-makers. However, notwithstanding the fact that some major trends emerged fr om the public consultation, it 
should be underlined that these results cannot be extrapolated to European societies as a 
whole nor do they have the scientific va lidity of research co nducted under strict 
methodological conditions. There ar e three reasons for this, namely that the consultation did 
not intend to function as an opinion poll on th is subject; the significant differences in 
participation figures across countries
2; and the fact that the degree of representation of each 
response varies enormously.3 
                                                 
1 SEC(2007)1009. 
2 Although responses were received from all 27 Member States, two of them alone account for half the 
number of responses recei ved, namely Italy (27% of the responses) and Slovenia (23%). 
3 While some responses only represen t the individual who signs them (e .g. a single student, teacher or 
parent), others are themselves the result of large consultations conducted at the level of national or 
European-level organisations. 
EN 3   EN The European Commission has published separately  a report containing a de tailed analysis of 
the public consultation contributions taken as a whole. The individual responses submitted to 
the consultation, which have also been publishe d separately whenever  their authors have 
given their consent, constitute a stimulati ng collection of views on our school education 
systems of much individual interest4. 
2. Main results of the public consultation 
482 valid responses were received, coming from all Member States of the European Union 
(plus Norway), though their geographical spread was very uneven. In relation to the type of 
respondents, schools and teache rs accounted for 36.9% of all the responses, while 27.4% 
came from individual students. Other individua ls (11.6%) and national organisations (11.4%) 
were also active in the consultation. Public authorities (Ministries of Education of the 
Member States and local and regional author ities) accounted for 7.3% of the answers, and 
European level associations for 5%.  
The following section summarises the main tr ends emerging from the consultation, question 
by question. 
2.1. Key competences for all 
How can schools be organised in su ch a way as to provide all st udents with the full range of 
key competences?  
The main basis for this question was the Recomm endation of the European Parliament and the 
Council on key competences  for lifelong learning5. The contents of this Recommendation are 
summarised on pages 12-13 below.  
There was an overall consensus among all groups  of respondents that  school curricula and 
teaching methodologies need to enable students to develop their own learning competences in a more flexible learning environment. In  general there was strong support for the 
reinforcement of transversal competences at sc hools. Many responses stressing the need for 
schools to develop independence and autonomy among pupils, as well as  responsibility for 
their own learning. The developmen t of creativity and intercultu ral skills by schools was also 
strongly supported. 
On the practical ways to tran smit the key competences, the res ponses put forward a variety of 
proposals, which mostly emphasise the importa nce of active teaching methodologies and of a 
cross-curricular approach to supplement subject-based learni ng, and which sets aside time and 
space for students and teachers in order better to address complex issues.  
2.2. Lifelong learning 
How can schools equip young people with the competences and motivation to make learning a 
lifelong activity?  
                                                
 
4 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/educa tion_culture/consult/index_en.html 
5 Recommendation 2006/962/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on 
key competences for lifelong learning. OJ L L394 of 30.12.2006, p. 10. 
EN 4   EN It is widely accepted that one of the key tasks of  our school systems is to prepare students for 
future participation in lifelong learning. While answers to the pr evious question focused very 
much on the acquisition of the necessary competen ces for that purpose, most of the answers to 
question 2 focused on fostering positive atti tudes towards and motivation for learning. 
There was a clear emphasis on the need to motiv ate young people to learn and to involve them 
in the learning process. Student motivation, re sponsibility and autonomy, together with a 
learner-oriented approach, were seen as th e main preconditions for the development of 
successful lifelong learning strate gies. The ways proposed to achieve these goals were again 
diverse depending on the group of respondents. Wh ile students showed relatively high interest 
and support for student autonomy and learner oriented appro aches, many schools and national 
level organisations stressed the need for teachers to be able to work autonomously in order to 
develop the pedagogic strategies  that work best for them. 
2.3. The Economy 
How can school systems contribute to supporti ng long-term sustainable economic growth in 
Europe?  
Overall this was the question th at showed the lowest degree of  response, with most answers 
coming from national authorities and European leve l organisations. This f act, and the fact that 
many respondents took issue with what they per ceived as an excessive economic focus of the 
consultation document, is in itself interesting:  it suggests some discontinuity between the 
world of the school and the world of the economy. 
The respondents, however, also emphasised th e value of cooperation between business and 
schools, which could be enhanced through th e development of exchanges. Better career 
guidance and the development of  labour market competences by schools were also identified 
as areas for improvement. These competences, however, were not necessarily understood as 
narrow technical skills, but rath er as broad competences – social competences, learning to 
learn, team work, etc – which should make st udents more employable in the future.  
2.4 Equity 
How can school systems best respond to the ne ed to promote equity, to respond to cultural 
diversity and to redu ce early school leaving?  
The high level of interest in this question this c ould be interpreted as a result in itself – there is 
a broad consensus that what happens in schools is important for equity in our societies.  
The strong support for measures for students with some form of disadvantage is indeed one of 
the main conclusions of the c onsultation. In general terms th ere was wide support for the 
concept of schools that accommod ate students of different backgrounds, and responses by 
authorities and associations showed a sign ificant interest in the development of 
comprehensive policy frameworks in this respect, e.g. anti-discrim ination or reinforcement of 
the mixity of students. The provision of out -of-school placements, mentors or second-chance 
schools were also often mentioned as wa ys to tackle early school leaving. 
More and better early learning oppo rtunities, on the other hand, we re perceived as one of the 
most effective ways to improve the equity of the overall system by many respondents from 
European and national associations, as well as public authorities. 
EN 5   EN 2.5. Inclusion 
If schools are to respond to each pupil's individual learning needs, what can be done as 
regards curricula, school organisa tion and the roles of teachers?  
More flexibility in the curriculum, allowing fo r it to be tailored to the individual pupil's 
specific needs, and more suppor t from teachers or ancillary staff – who should increasingly 
act as 'coaches' or 'mentors' – were some of the key topics raised under this question. There 
was also considerable interest in identifying gifted pupils and making special provision for 
them, though strategies were not precisely de fined. Moving away from a purely age-based 
curriculum to one more closely linked to the development of intellectual abilities was 
supported by some educational organisations. Asse ssment was raised as a further element that 
needs to be reconsidered in the light of th e need to respond to i ndividual learning needs. 
2.6. Citizenship 
How can school communities help to prepare y oung people to be responsible citizens, in line 
with fundamental values such as peace and toleran ce of diversity?  
The presence of some form of citizenship e ducation in the curriculum was supported by most 
respondents who answered on this po int, but the ways put forward to implement it, either as a 
separate subject or as a cross-curricular theme, were diverse.  
There was a strong interest in fostering commitment to democracy through the school 
experience itself, e.g. by ensuring that children feel respected as  individuals and involved in 
school decisions, for instance through school c ouncils, or by mixing pupils in heterogeneous 
groups and carrying out team work or ex change of experiences between them.  
Tackling bullying, violence and in tolerance at schools as well as finding better ways to open 
up schools, as institutions, to th eir local communities, were also  perceived as relevant for 
better developing citizenship. 
2.7. Teachers 
How can school staff be trained and suppor ted to meet the challenges they face? 
A significant agreement at all levels emerged in relation to the need to rethink current models 
of initial teacher education in order to link theory and practice better. It is seen as essential that those who enter the profession are supporte d in developing a deeper understanding of the 
historical, social and cultural contexts within which they work. Teacher education also needs 
to present teaching as a problem-solving or re search-in-action activity during which teaching 
methods and strategies, formal or informal, are ex amined in relation to the children's learning 
and their process. Classroom management strategi es were raised as another issue which needs 
to be better addressed by  initial teacher education. 
Another focus was the need to improve the in-s ervice training of teachers in terms of quality, 
recognition of such training, and of resources, wh ere many teachers feel th at they do not have 
enough free time outside teaching in order to support their professional development.  
Improved recognition of teaching as a professi on was also important for many respondents, 
including, for some countries, the issue of increasing teachers' pay. 
EN 6   EN 2.8. School communities 
How can school communities best receive the leadership and motivation they need to 
succeed? How can they be empowered to develop in response to changing needs and demands?  
The creation of inclusive learning communities in  which everyone – staff, students, parents – 
is involved and valued for their input is seen as  key to the success of schools as organisations. 
In general, it is felt that sc hool autonomy and the development of less hierarchical structures 
can reinforce this involvement.  
While many authorities and associations favour  increasing the monitoring and evaluation of 
schools, many teacher respondents from various countries refer to the perceived unhelpfulness 
of current inspectoral systems. Current tre nds towards a more advisory role for school 
inspectors are welcomed. 
EN 7   EN B. THEORETICAL AND EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE 
The numbers in brackets (e.g. 1.1) refer to the corresponding paragraph in the Communication 
COM(2008)425. 
Preparing young people for the 21st century  
(1.1) 
The changing nature of the skills and levels  of qualification require d by the economy puts 
great pressure on schools. A 2008 Cedefop study summarising future skills needs in Europe judges that the present trends will persist, namely 'continui ng shifts away from primary 
industries (especially agriculture) and from traditional manufacturing industries towards 
services and knowledge-intensive jobs'
6. Nevertheless, a further 13 million jobs are projected 
by 2015, largely in the business and miscellaneous  sectors, but also in distribution and 
transport, and non-marketed services  such as health and education7. This means that 
workforces need to adapt, with schools prov iding the foundation for the acquisition of new 
skills throughout life, particularly by adults and peopl e at risk of unemployment.  
Technological and other changes te nd to polarise the demand fo r skills, leading to many jobs 
at higher levels and at the lower end of the job spectrum. There is a projected increase in jobs 
demanding more formal qualifications.  
Chart 1.1 shows a prognosis of future skills need s. It shows demand shifting toward a higher 
skilled and more flexible labour force8. 
                                                 
6 Future skills needs in Europe , A medium term forecast (Synthesis report), CEDEFOP (2008), p. 86. 
7 Ibid. 
8 The definition of the categories in the chart are the following: non-routine analytic (solving problems 
for which there are no rule-based solutions); non-rou tine interactive (interacting with humans to acquire 
information, to explain it, or to persuade others of its implications for action); routine cognitive (mental tasks that are well described by deductive or induc tive rules); routine manual (physical tasks than can 
be well described using deductive or inductive rules); non-routine manual (physical tasks that cannot be 
described by such rules). See F. Levy, R. J. Murnane, The new division of labour  (2004). 
EN 8   EN Chart 1.1: How the demand for skills has changed: economy-wide measures of routine 
and non-routine task input (US)  
404550556065
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000Mean task input as the percentiles 
of the 1960 task distributionRoutine Manual
Nonroutine Manual
Routine cognitive
Nonroutine analytic
Nonroutine interactive
 
A. Schleicher, 'Europe's Skill Challenge ' OECD Directorate for Education. Presentation held during the Lisbon 
Council, (15 October 2007).  
Available online: http://www.lisboncouncil.net/media/schleicher_skills_presentation151007.pdf  
Adapted from F. Levy, and R. J. Murnane, The new division of labour (Princeton Univers ity Press, 2004). 
(1.2 - 1.4) 
Many studies point to a signif icant impact of schooling on sk ills development, revealing 
correlations between the quality of schools and the quality of the labour force. Hanuschek and 
Kimko conclude that labour-force quality di fferences are related to schooling (but not 
necessarily to the resources devoted by a count ry to schooling); and that the quality of the 
labour force has a causal impact on growth9.  
The years spent in school have a great imp act in shaping people’s participation in, and 
attitudes to, further learning. Pa rticipation in post-compulsory education and training tends to 
be proportional to the level of prior educat ion. ‘Typically people with higher levels of 
education are more easily reached by and more receptive to measures to encourage 
participation in e ducation and training'10. Chart 1.2 below shows the pa rticipation of adults in 
education and training according to their educa tional attainment. It sh ows that in 2007 the 
highest rate of participation wa s for people aged betw een 25 and 34, regardle ss of their level 
of education; after age 34, participation rate s decreased; and the pa rticipation of those 
between ages 55 and 64 was less than one th ird that of those between 25 and 34. Older 
persons with tertiary education also took part  in lifelong learning half as frequently as 
                                                 
9 E. A.  Hanushek, D. D. Kimko, 'Schooling, labour force quality, and the growth of nations', American 
Economic Review  90 (2000). 
10 SEC(2007)1284, Progress towards the Lisbon objectives in education and training, Indicators and 
Benchmarks,  p.81. 
EN 9   EN younger people with the same level of education.  The chart also shows that individuals with 
higher levels of attainment – in any age group  – participate more in lifelong learning than 
others with lower levels of educational attainment. 
Chart 1.2: Participation in lifelong learning  
by age and educational attainment (EU-27), 2007  
0510152025
25-64 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64
Age%
Lower secondary completion Upper secondary completion
Tertiary completion All
 
Data source : Eurostat (2008): EU Labour Force Survey.  
Recent research points to strong correlati ons between education and well-being, though 
empirical data remain scarce11. Well-being in this context means not only educational well-
being but also economic well-being and the enjoym ent of civil liberties, relative freedom from 
crime, enjoyment of clean environment and indi vidual states of mental and physical health. 
An OECD study on well-being concluded that huma n and social capital are closely related to 
the way in which institutions and political and social arrangements impact on society. It also 
pointed out that to sustain well -being, adequate investment in  human and social capital is 
needed. Thus, for instance, investment in th e development of knowledge and skills helps to 
secure economic as well as social and personal well-being12.  
The ‘capability’ approach developed by Amartya Sen helps illuminate the concept of well-
being and its relation to edu cation. Education is viewed as an unqualified good for human 
capability expansion and human freedom. The relevance of the capability approach for education, well-being and equity is that it examin es issues such as the fair distribution of 
valued capabilities in and through education, or the availability of opportunities for pupils to 
convert their resour ces into capabilities
13. 
A current OECD project shows that learning experiences ca n foster civic and social 
engagement: by shaping what people know, by de veloping competences that help people 
                                                 
11 See European Journal of Education  43 (March 2008) for current rese arch on the relationship between 
education and well-being. 
12 The well-being of nations , OECD (2001), pp. 10-13. 
13 A. Sen, Development as freedom  (1999); M. Walker, E. Unterhalter (eds.), Amartya Sen's capability 
approach and social justice in education  (2007), p. 5.  
EN 10   EN apply, contribute and develop their knowledge, by cultivating values, attitudes, beliefs and 
motivations that encourage civic and social e ngagement, and by increasing social status. More 
schooling is not enough. The quality of the le arning experience and approaches to learning 
both inside and outside school  are key. Curriculum, school ethos, and pedagogy are crucial 
variables; learning environments that stress responsibility, open dialogue, respect and the 
application of theory and idea s in practical group-oriented wo rk seem to work better than 
civic education on its own14. 
A review of the evidence concluded that more years of schooling are su bstantially associated 
with higher levels of well-bei ng and better health behaviours15. 
A recent study from the UNICEF Innocenti Centre identified several factors that have an 
impact on children's well-being: material we ll-being, health and safety, educational well-
being, peer and fa mily relationships16.  
The links between school attainment and em ployment are well documented. The estimated 
long term effect on economic output of one additi onal year of education in the OECD area is 
generally between 3% and 6%17. Among OECD countries, comp letion of upper secondary 
level of education is typically considered to be the minimum level of education needed to 
obtain a satisfactory, competitive position in th e labour market. As Chart 1.3 shows, on 
average, the rate of employment among indivi duals with upper secondary education is 18 
percentage points higher than among individuals who have not completed upper secondary 
education.  
                                                 
14 L. Feinstein, R. Sabates, T. M. Anderson, A. Sorhaindo, C. Hammond , 'What are the effects of 
education on health?', in R. Desjardins and T. Schuller (eds.), Measuring the effects of education on 
health and civic/ social engagement , OECD (2006). 
15 Understanding the social outcomes of learning , OECD (2007), p.105. 
16 An overview of child well-being in rich countries , UNICEF, Innocenti Centre (2007). 
17 Education at a glance , OECD, (2006), p. 154. 
EN 11   EN Chart 1.3: Employment rates, by educational attainment (2007)  
Percentage of the 25-to-64-year-o ld population that is employed   
0102030405060708090100
Sweden
Denmark
Malta
United Kingdom
Netherlands
Portugal
Estonia
Cyprus
Latvia
Ireland
Austria
Finland
Spain
Czech Republic
Lithuania
France
Bulgaria
Slovenia
Germany
Italy
Belgium
Luxembourg
Slovakia
Hungary
Romania
Greece
Poland
EU-27 Average%
Below upper secondary 
Upper secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary
 
Data Source:  Eurostat (2008): EU Labour Force Survey. 
The principal impact of educatio n on growth is estimated to be to raise the pr oductivity of the 
whole workforce, rather than to increase the num ber of individuals able to bring about radical 
innovations. Low skills seem to i nhibit rates of techni cal innovation and rates of adoption of 
more productive work organisation. Average sk ills levels explain over 55% of growth 
differences in GDP per capita between 1960 and 1995 in OECD countries18.  
Research has sought to estimate the relations hip between human capita l and economic growth 
using internationally comparable  literacy scores (1994 Interna tional Adult Lite racy Survey 
(IALS) data) from 14 OECD countries. The outcome s of this research in dicate that a country 
able to attain literacy scores 1% higher than  the international average will achieve levels of 
labour productivity and GDP per capita th at are 2.5 and 1.5% higher, respectively19.  
(1.5) 
The data for the three EU benchmarks most strongly related to school education do not 
demonstrate sufficient progress to achieve th e Union’s objectives by 2010. There has been 
constant improvement in reducing the proportion of  early school leavers, but faster progress is 
needed in order to achieve the benchmark. There has been slow but steady progress in 
increasing the proportion of young people who complete upper secondary education. The 
                                                 
18 A. Schleicher, J. J. Rousseau lecture,  Lisbon Council meeting, October 2007. 
19 S. Coulombe, J.F. Tremblay, S. Marchand, ‘Literacy scores, Human capital and growth across fourteen 
OECD Countries’, Statistics Canada: Human Resour ces and Skills Development (2004), p. 31. and 
appendix F, pp. 66-74, cited in Education at a glance , OECD, (2006), p. 155. 
EN 12   EN share of low achievers in reading has increased  in the EU, though some Member States have 
achieved improvements. 
Chart 1.4: Progress towards meetin g the 5 benchmarks (EU average) 
-80-70-60-50-40-30-20-100102030405060708090100110120130140
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year2010 benchmarks = 100MST graduates
   Lifelong learning participation
Early school leavers
Upper secondary completion
Low achievers in readingprogress required181
(below 0 = performance 
getting worse)
 
Data source: OECD (PISA), Eurostat (UOE and EU Labour Force Survey). 
Source: Progress towards the Lisbon objectives in education and training. Indicators and benchmarks  (2007, 
updated 2008). 
2. FOCUS ON COMPETENCES  
Implementing key competences  (2.2) 
A 2006 Recommendation of the European Parlia ment and the Council in troduced a European 
framework of Key Competen ces for Lifelong Learning
20. The Recommendation aims to 
provide policy makers, teachers and learners themselves with a reference tool. It calls on Member States to ensure that all young people are given the possibility to develop the eight key competences by the end of initial education a nd training and that specif ic attention is paid 
to the needs of disadvantaged learners. It re commends that adults have the opportunity to 
learn, maintain and update their key competences throughout their lives.  
The key competences are: communication in the mother tongue, communication in foreign 
languages, mathematical competence and ba sic competences in science and technology, 
                                                
 
20 Recommendation 2006/962/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on 
key competences for lifelong learning . OJ L L394 of 30.12.2006, p. 10. 
EN 13   EN digital competence, learning to learn, social and civic compet ences, sense of initiative and 
entrepreneurship and, cultural awareness and expression. They are all considered equally 
important, because each of them can contribute to a successful life in  a knowledge society. 
Many of the competences overlap and interloc k: aspects essential to one domain support 
competence in another. Competence in the fund amental basic skills of language, literacy, 
numeracy and in information and communica tion technologies (ICT) is an essential 
foundation for learning, and learning -to-learn supports all other learning activities. There are a 
number of themes that are applied throughout the Reference Framewor k: critical thinking, 
creativity, initiative, problem solving, risk assessment, decision taking, and constructive 
management of feelings play a role in all eight key competences. 
A 2002 Eurydice survey  on key competences  noted that curricula were increasingly focusing 
on the successful application of knowledge and skills than on the simple transmission of knowledge
21. As a result, most education authorities had redefined their educational aims in 
terms of competences. Developing the capacity to apply knowledge and skills increases their 
"transfer value", and learning consequently beco mes more attractive an d beneficial for the 
individual and society. Some education systems have recently  focused their attention on 
competences applicable to a maximu m number of real-life situations. 
Recent working papers (2004, 2007) of the peer-learning Cluster ‘Key Competences-
Curriculum Reform’ confirm this trend22. The Cluster has undertaken two mapping exercises 
on how national policy agendas for lifelong le arning and school curr icula recognise key 
competences. Either implicitly or explicitly key competences are included in most important 
documents guiding school education. Much empha sis has been put on the consistency and 
comprehensiveness of provision – both from a systemic and from a learner perspective. 
A 2006 Eurydice survey mapped how entrepreneursh ip education has been integrated into 
secondary curricula. It found that some member states explicitly recognise entrepreneurship 
education, others teach it as pa rt of general subjects, while a third group of countries is 
developing other initia tives in the field23. Some Europe-wide initiatives foster entrepreneurial 
competences within school settings. In the fr amework of the 'Junior achievement' programme 
– running in partnership between local busin esses and schools – younge r students learn in 
interactive ways about how communities and bu sinesses work, while older students can set up 
and run their own companies for a year24.  
The 2007 Commission Communicati on on financial education poi nted out how financial 
literacy should be enhanced on a continuous basi s at all stages of life by being integrated 
across subjects, such as mathema tics, history and entrepreneurship25.  
A recent study on the future of the knowledge economy notes that the challenge now is to 
create environments for learning that incorp orate both economic and civic goals. While the 
skills of the workforce remain important, they  alone are not a sufficient source of decisive 
                                                 
21 Key competencies: A developing concep t in general compulsory education , Eurydice Survey 5 (2002). 
22 Working Group B, Progress report 2004, http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/lang2004.pdf ; 
Cluster ‘Key Competences, Curriculum reform’, Synthesis report on peer learning in 2007. 
http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/peer07_en.pdf   
23 Entrepreneurship education in Europe , Eurydice (2006). 
24 See: www.ja-ye.org an d similar projects e.g.: http://www.ecole-et-entr eprise.fr/index.htm . 
25 COM(2007)808. 
EN 14   EN competitive advantage. This depends on how the capabilities of the workforce are combined 
in innovative and productive ways26. 
(2.3) 
The European Framework of Key Competences stre sses the importance of learning-to-learn as 
key to acquiring other competences and deve loping capabilities. Learning competences are 
not mastered in a single straightforward way but are shaped by  a broad range of 
developmental influences to which learners ar e exposed in and out of  school. Learning skills 
are increasingly not only embedded implicitly in the curriculum but are also being taught in an explicit way. Current projec ts focus on the development of  self-reporting instruments for 
formative and diagnostic use by learners and their teachers
27, or on the development of pupils' 
learning practices rather than on their expressed beliefs (learning how to learn)28. The 
European Commission is curr ently developing an indicator  of the learning to learn 
competence.  
The importance of learning capacity in terms of performance is shown in an OECD analysis 
of the relative performance of students who control their lear ning. Students' approaches to 
learning measured in PISA explain one fift h of the difference in students’ literacy 
performance. But if students’ tendency to cont rol their learning is taken as an outcome of 
learning, since learning autonomy is a key preco ndition of lifelong learning, an even stronger 
relationship becomes visible29. 
(2.5) 
Two European projects on the impact of new approaches to teaching and learning in schools 
identified several barriers to change in  learning and teaching:  professional capacity, 
curriculum restraint, and lack of appropriate teaching material30.  
The report of the Cluster ‘Key Competences-Cu rriculum Reform’ claims that the successful 
implementation of curricula based on key comp etences is not in contradiction with the 
organisation of teaching and learning according to school subjects that can allow for a 
development of in-depth knowledge of a certai n discipline and target the acquisition of 
specific skills. However, the challenges are seve ral. All teachers, irrespective of their subject 
                                                 
26 P. Brown, H. Lauder, D. Ashton, 'Education, glob alisation and the future of the knowledge economy', 
in: D. Epstein, R. Boden, R. Deem, F. Rizvi, S. Fight (eds.), World year book of education 2008 . 
Geographies of knowledge, geometries of power. Higher education in the 21st century  (2008), pp.18-20. 
On the transformation of the relationship between education, jobs and rewards see for example: M. 
Lawn, 'Borderless education: im agining a European education sp ace in the time of brands and 
networks', in: A Novoao , M. Lawn (eds.), Fabricating Europe: the formation of an education space  
(2002) and M. Room, The European challenge: innovation, policy learning and social cohesion in the 
knowledge economy  (2005). 
27 For example R. Deakin-Crick, 'Developing an effective lifelong learning inventory : the ELLI project’, 
Assessment in Education  11/3( 2004), pp. 247-272 . 
28 For example M. James et al, Improving learning how to learn – classrooms, schools and networks  
(2007). 
29 Messages from PISA  2000 , OECD (2004); see also PISA 2003 results published in Learning for 
tomorrow's world , OECD (2004), particularly chapter 3. 
30 S. Power, Education. Policy Synthesis of EU Research Results , Series  N°4 (2007), p. 29. 'Teacher 
training, reflective theories and teleguidance: pros pectives and possibilities in  teacher training in 
Europe' and 'Computer –supported collaborative learning in primary and secondary education'. 
EN 15   EN specialisation, should be aware of, and feel responsible fo r, developing the key competences 
of their students in the whol e school context. The developm ent of competences is based on 
active and experiential l earning, supporting learners' individu al development and personalised 
learning.  
Teaching and learning with subject-centred and cross-curricular elements need to be well 
coordinated; teachers can collaborate  effectively if each member of a school community has a 
clear understanding of how to s upport the developmen t of key competences. Pupil assessment 
should follow the same logic. School leadership should build  on a common vision of school 
development and a shared or distributed approach  that encourages teachers to work in teams 
rather than only alone31.  
Some Member States have us ed cross-curricular themes as ways of developing key 
competences. A 2005 project brought together ten case studies from five European countries 
in order to identify the problems schools face wh ile dealing with cross-curricular work, and 
the solutions they find in doing so. Table 2.1 shows cross-curricular themes and their frequency of occurrence
32 . 
                                                 
31 Cluster ‘Key Competences, Curriculum reform’, Synthesis report on peer learning in 2007. 
http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/peer07_en.pdf  , p.9.  
32 Cross-curricular themes in secondary education , Report of a CIDREE collaborative project  (2005) 
Cross-curricular themes are interdisciplinary themes, which integrate language skills (reading, speaking, 
listening, viewing, and thinking) with a variety of content areas, such as science, art, music and so on. 
They are not identical with cro ss-curricular or transversal co mpetences as identified in the 
Recommendation on key competences mentioned before. 
EN 16   EN Table 2.1: Summary of occurrence and respective status of cross-curricular themes in 27 
European countries/communities include d in the survey (Maes et al., 2001). 
Cross-curricular theme Number of 
countries (N=27) 
where this theme 
is included in the 
curriculum Statutory Not statutory 
1. Health / physical / sport education / life skills 25 16 9 
2. Environmental / ecological education 21 14 7 
3. Citizenship / human rights / co-operation / 
political / peace education 19 14 5 
4. Social / communicative skills / reading / 
speech 17 13 4 
5. Media education / ICT 15 11 4 
6. Learning to learn / ability to think critically 13 10 3 
7. Artistic / cultural education 12 8 4 
8. Philosophical education / ethics 9 6 3 
9. Intercultural education 10 8 2 
10. Problem solving 8 6 2 
11. International education 7 3 4 
12. Road safety / traffic education 6 4 2 
13. Preparation for the world of work / 
entrepreneurship education 6 4 2 
14. Technological education 5 3 2 
15. Economic / consumer education 4 2 2 
16. Career guidance 2 1 1 
 
Source : Cross-curricular themes in secondary education; Report of a CIDREE collaborative project  (2005),  
p. 4. 
The study identified a number of problems relate d to the implementation of cross-curricular 
themes at the level of teacher s, pupils and the school itself. It emphasised the importance of 
motivation and involvement by teachers and pupils, and the importance of assessment. 
Problems at the school level include subject curr iculum overload, timetable inflexibility, lack 
of infrastructure, space and especially time , the pressure of fina l exams and university 
entrance requirements, and teacher training whic h prepares new teachers insufficiently for 
working with cross-curricular themes33. 
Literacy and numeracy 
(2.6-2.7) 
The European Framework of Key Competences define s reading literacy as an essential part of 
the ability to express and interp ret thoughts, feelings and facts in both oral and written form 
and to interact linguistically in an appropriate  way in the full range of societal and cultural 
contexts: education and training, work, home and leisure. Similarly, a sound knowledge of 
numbers, measures and mathematical structures together with ability in basic mathematical 
operations and presentations, and understanding of mathematical terms and concepts are key 
                                                 
33 Ibid., pp.67-69. 
EN 17   EN to the ability to solve everyday problems and to  the willingness to use mathematical modes of 
thought to look for reasons and to assess their validity34.  
According to the PISA 2006 surv ey, the average reading score in participating EU Member 
States fell from 491 points in 2000 to 490 point s in 2003 and to 487 points in 2006 (see Table 
2.2). Performance deteriorated in a large number of Member States. The only EU country where average performance improved signifi cantly was Poland. In relation to the EU 
benchmark of a 20% reduction in the proportion of low achievers in re ading, the percentage 
of low achievers increased from 19.8% in 2003  to 21.2% in 2006 (16 EU countries). If the 
comparison is based on two additional coun tries (BG, RO) for which 2000 results are 
available, the result is: 21.3% in 2000 and 24.1 in 2006: a significant increase in the 
proportion of low achievers in the EU. 
Table 2.2: Differences in reading perf ormance between PISA 2006 and PISA 2000
 
 
                                                 
34 For full definitions, see http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/objectives_en.html#basic  
EN 18   EN Note: Differences that are st atistically significant at the 95% confidence  level are indicated in bold and at the 
90% confidence level are indicated in bold italic. 
*EU averages for PISA 2006 scores refer to EU-25, the average score difference to PISA 2000 refers to EU-18 
and is the arithmetic averag e of country results for which data are available.  
Source : PISA 2006: Vol. 2 Data/Données , p. 233 (Table 6.3a).  
As for gender gaps in performance in reading, according to PISA 2006 al most twice as many 
boys as girls had low reading skills: 17.6% of 15 year old girls and 30.4 % of 15 year old 
boys.  
The Cluster ‘Key Competences-Curriculum Reform’ surveyed good practice on promoting 
literacy from a number of Member States35. Several good examples from countries that 
perform well in PISA surveys (e.g. Finland an d Sweden) show how spec ial support to raise 
motivation, extra time spent on reading and sp ecial teaching methods can improve students' 
literacy performance36. A broad range of research on the subject of literacy examines the 
beneficial effects of early intervention, the si gnificant impact of home literacy activities and 
the importance of deve loping good reading habits37.  
(2.8) 
As far as numeracy skills are concerned, th e Cluster ‘Maths, Science and Technology’ has 
concluded that 'proficiency in mathematics is  today not mainly an affair about counting 
correctly; it is a multifarious general compet ence including problem solving and modelling, 
concept understanding, reasoning and communication,  procedural efficien cy, and appreciation 
of the role of mathematics in history, science, culture , work and society. A broad 
mathematical knowledge is in this aspect a part of a great cultural heritage, essential for both 
personal and societal self-est eem, creativity and growth'38.  
Table 2.3 shows that for most countries perf ormance in mathematics remained broadly 
unchanged between PISA 2003 and PISA 2006. Ho wever for some countries there were 
notable changes. Among EU Member  States there was significant deterioration in the case of 
Belgium, France, the Netherlands and Sweden and a major improvement in Greece.  
                                                 
35 see Progress Report, Nov. 2004. http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/basic2004.pdf 
36 See for example: P. Linnakylä, 'From struggling to striving adolescent readers' ; in: P. Linnakylä, I. 
Arffman (eds.), Finnish reading literacy. When quality and equity meet  (2007), pp. 199-213.; S. 
Sulkunen, 'Authentic texts and Finnish youngsters: a focus on gender', in: ibid., pp. 175-198.; P. 
Linnakylä 'Reading literacy in Finland: developing equal and empowered readers', A Finnish position 
paper for EU project ADORE/Socrates (28.2.2007), pp. 1-17. 
37 The Journal of Research in Reading  on: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-
9817.2005.00281.x?journalCode=jrir 
38 B. Johansson, Report of MST cluster on peer learning activity organised by the National Centre for 
Mathematics Education, Gothenburg University, Sweden, (2007), p. 12.  
EN 19   EN Table 2.3: Differences in mathematics pe rformance between PISA 2006 and PISA 2003 
 
Note: Differences that are st atistically significant at the 95% confidence  level are indicated in bold and at the 
90% confidence level are indicated in bold italic. 
*EU averages for PISA 2006 scores refer to EU-25, the average score difference to PISA 2003 refers to EU-19 
and is the arithmetic averag e of country results for which data are available.  
Source:  PISA 2006: Vol. 2 Data/Données , p. 235 (Table 6.3b). 
The gender difference in mathematics was less than  a third as large as for reading, and in all 
Member States boys outperformed girls or there were no significant differences.  
PISA results also show strong  correlations between students' attitudes towards mathematics 
and mathematics performance. In Table 2.4 below,  ‘attitudes’ refers to students' interest in 
and enjoyment of mathematics, their instrumental motivation (meaning external rewards such as good jobs etc.), their self concept (their belief about thei r own mathematical competence) 
self efficacy and anxiety. The highest nega tive impact on performance is caused by anxiety, 
EN 20   EN while the highest positive impact is by self-con cept in mathematics, followed by interest and 
instrumental motivation.  
Table 2.4: Relationship of students'  attitudes towards mathematics  
and mathematics performance (2003) 
 
Note: * indicates that the effect is st atistically significantly great er (>) than that of the OECD average; effect is 
statistically significantly less (<) th an that of the OECD average. 
Data Source: PISA 2003.  
Source: OECD (2007): Education at a glance 2007 , p. 100 (Table A5.2a).  
The report Science education now: a renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe  prepared by 
an expert group for the European Commission on science education and mathematics, chaired 
by Michel Rocard, explored the prospects of new pedagogies for more effective science 
education and called for school science teaching pedagogy to shift from mainly deductive to 
inquiry-based methods39. The Nuffield Foundation emphasises th at it is crucial that science 
education offer value for all and not only for fu ture scientists. 'For this reason the goal of 
                                                 
39 Science education now: a renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe,  European Commission (2007). 
EN 21   EN science education must be first and foremost, to  offer an education that develops students' 
understanding both of the canon of scientif ic knowledge and how science functions'40.  
Nevertheless not all studies in the field identi fy a strong correlation between positive attitudes 
and good performance. An analysis of the data from TIMSS 1999, which measured both student attainment and student attitude towards science, show s that the higher the average 
student achievement, the less positive is their attitude towards science
41. 
Personalised approaches to learning 
(2.9 - 2.11) 
An approach based upon individuals’ competences implies more personalised teaching and 
learning. An OECD collection of studies on pers onalising learning pointed out that ‘one size 
fits all’ approaches to school knowledge and or ganisation are ill adapted both to individuals’ 
needs and to the knowle dge society at large'42.  
Personalised learning is not identical with indi vidualised learning; it 'can be seen as an 
approach in educational policy and practice whereby every student matters, it equalises 
learning opportunities in te rms of learning skills and motivation to learn'43. Evidence from a 
Eurydice survey shows that a personalised appr oach does not exclude group processes; on the 
contrary, personalised approaches are of ten carried out within group processes44. 
Järvelä has identified and explored the main arguments for personalising learning and for 
fostering learning capacity. Personalising le arning can increase collaborative efforts and 
networked forms of learning. It can increase stude nts' interest and engagement in learning 
activities and their curiosity and creativity can be inspired by it. It can contribute to better learning results if students learn with the aim of developing better  learning strategies, 
technological capacity for individual and soci al learning activities and learning communities 
with collaborative learning m odels. Personalised learning can  take into account different 
values, and cultural features ca n be respected if the individu al person and his/her needs are 
deemed important. Lastly it can potentially improve the us e of technology in education
45. 
Emerging evidence shows that 'systems capable of achieving universally high standards are 
those that can personalise the programme of l earning and progression offered to the needs and 
motivations of each learner'46. According to the OECD project ‘ No more failures. Ten steps to 
                                                 
40 Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. A report to the Nuffield Foundation (Jan. 2008), p.7.  
41 Y. Ogura, Graph of student attitude v student attainment . Based on data from: M. Martin et al, TIMSS 
1999 International Science Report: findings from IE A's repeat of the third international mathematics 
and science study of the eighth grade (2000). 
42 Schooling for tomorrow: personalising education , OECD (2007).  
43 S. Järvelä, 'Personalised learning? New in sights into fostering learning capacity', in: Schooling for 
tomorrow: personalising education , OECD (2007), pp. 31-46.  
44 Based on PIRLS 2001 data a breakdown of pupils by the organisational approach most often used to 
teach reading showed that teachers use whole-cl ass teaching, ability grou ping and individualised 
instruction in the classroom. Nevertheless whol e-class teaching seems to be dominant. In Key data on 
education in Europe , Eurydice (2005), p. 287. 
45 Ibid., pp.42-43. 
46 D. Istance, 'Directions for schooling and edu cational innovation from recent OECD analyses', 
Presentation given at the Slovenian Presidency conference on 'Promoting innovation and creativity: 
schools' response to the challenges of future societies' (April 2008). Also about the use of whole-class 
EN 22   EN equity in education’,  several classroom practices can help to identify early those who fall 
behind and to give them extr a support. Methods such as formative assessment (discussed 
below) and reading recovery strategies in th e US, a hierarchy of formal and non-formal 
interventions in Finland, extra teaching in Flanders and programmes personalisés d’aide et de 
progrès  in France all help the student to catch up47. It remains to be explored how the 
personalisation agenda can avoid systemic in equality and move towards less specified, 
controlled and standardised approaches in favour of greater crea tivity and diversity.  
Assessing learning outcomes 
(2.12) 
Black and William (Assessment Reform Group, UK) synthesised evidence from over 250 
studies linking assessment and learning. The c onclusion was that initiatives designed to 
enhance the effectiveness of the way assessment is used in the classroom to promote learning 
can raise pupil achievement. They  also found evidence that the gain was likely to be even 
more substantial for lower-achieving pupils48. 
According to them, less effective assessment a pproaches are those that encourage rote and 
superficial learning, over-emphasise grading rather than advising learners, use competitive teaching approaches which de-motivate some pupils, and in which feedback, testing and 
record-keeping serve more a mana gerial than a learning function. 
Criteria for assessment that improves learning in clude: it is embedded in a view of teaching 
and learning of which it is an essential part; it invol ves sharing learning goa ls with pupils; it 
aims to help pupils to know and to recognise the standard s they are aiming for; it involves 
pupils in self-assessment; it provides feedback which leads to pupils recognising their next 
steps and how to take them; it is underpinned by confidence that every student can improve; it 
involves both teacher and pupils revi ewing and reflecting on assessment data
49. 
Further studies also argue that assessment should help students' day-to day lear ning process. 
'Assessment should be designed and implemented with the goal of achieving maximum validity both in terms of learning outcomes and learning processes. It should help to advance 
learning as well as determine whether learning has occurred'
50. 
                                                                                                                                                         
teaching, same-ability grouping a nd personalised instruction see Key Data on education in Europe  
Eurydice (2005), p. 287 (figure E. 17). Based on teachers' questio nnaire and PIRLS 2001 data.  
47 For more detail on these see: S. Field et al, No more failures. Ten steps to equity in education , OECD 
(2007), particularly pp. 94-99. 
48 P. Black and D. William, 'Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment', Phi 
Delta Kappan , 80/ 2. (October 1998). 
49 'Assessment for Learning: beyond the Black Box' , Assessment Reform Group, (1999) p. 7. 
http://www.qca.org.uk/qca_4354.aspx 
50 A. Pollard, M. James, Teaching and Learning Research Prog ramme, UK (submission to consultation 
‘Schools for the 21st Century’ 2007); C. Ayala, 'F ormative Assessment Guideposts' , Science Scope , 
28/4 (2005), pp. 46-48. 
EN 23   EN (2.13) 
An OECD study on formative assessment in the secondary classroom suggested that areas for 
improvement include the alignment of summa tive and formative assessment, evaluation 
cultures in schools and links be tween classroom, school and systemic assessment evaluation51. 
The Cluster ‘Key Competences-Curriculum Refo rm’ has concluded that the assessment of 
transversal competences remains a major ch allenge. A recent European project on 'New 
Assessment Tools for Cross-curricular Competen cies in the Domain of Problem Solving' 
identified a lack of conceptual clarity as a major issue. Despite the high profile given to 
'problem solving' as a necessary educational skill, there is little precision within policy documents about what this actually means; and, while it is possible to assess problem solving 
skills in school settings and on a large scale, it is impossible to identify a general, unique 
'problem solving competence'
52. 
According to a recent Eurydice study on the au tonomy of teachers it is clear that in many 
Member States teachers have a significant degree of autonomy in internal assessment 
procedures. The three aspects of assessment examined are: the choi ce of criteria for internal 
assessment, responsibility for deciding whether pup ils repeat a year, and the part played by 
teachers in devising the content of examinati ons for certified qualifications. In the great 
majority of countries, schools ar e responsible for choosing the basis on which their pupils will 
be internally assessed and in many countries schools have full autonomy in this area. The 
situation is very different as  regards the involvement of sc hools and teachers in devising the 
content of written examinations for certified qualifications. No Europ ean country administers 
examinations of this kind for the completion of  primary education (ISCED 1). In countries 
which hold examinations at ISCED level 2, th ey are only rarely de vised at school level 53. 
A Cedefop comparative study (forthcoming, 2008)  involving 32 countries  observes that the 
specification of learning outcomes is being used in a range of countries that are modernising 
their school systems. The focus on what learners  are expected to know, understand or be able 
to do at the end of a learning process stimulates reform of systems, curriculum, pedagogy and 
assessment54. In compulsory schooling there are two different ways in which learning 
outcomes are given prominence: in the first, a core of learning outcomes is defined with 
reference to the school curriculum, to be ac hieved through the experi ence of learning (some 
outcomes are linked to specific subj ects, others are learnt across the whole curriculum); in the 
second, holistic approach, the learning outcomes th at the learner should achieve by the end of 
a phase or whole school educa tion are associated with agreed aims and objectives of the 
education system and only then are appropriate  subjects and groupings of subjects identified 
and brought into play. The pos sible shared ownership of learning outcomes gives an 
important role to stakeholders  (including social pa rtners, teaching and tr aining professionals, 
research communities, learners and the wider community). The study gives an overview of the 
learning outcomes approach on general education in all the Members States55.  
                                                 
51 Formative assessment. Improving le arning in secondary classrooms , OECD (2005), pp. 84-88.  
52 S. Power, Education. Policy synthesis of EU research results. Series N° 4, (2007), p. 28. 
53 For more details concerning specific countries see 'Levels of autonomy and responsibilities of teachers 
in Europe', Working document, Eurydice (forthcoming, 2008), Chapter 2. 
54 The shift to learning outcomes. Policies and practices in Europe , CEDEFOP (forthcoming, 2008) 
55 Ibid., in particular chapter 5. pp. 51-52, and chapter 6. pp. 58-64. 
EN 24   EN The learning outcomes approach and its imp act on the design of content is reflected in  the 
Recommendation establishing the European Qua lifications Framework for lifelong learning 
(EQF)56. It sets 2010 as the recommended target da te for countries to relate their national 
qualifications systems to the EQF, and 2012 for countries to ensu re that individual 
qualification certificates bear a reference to th e appropriate EQF level. The development of 
National Qualifications Frameworks in the Memb er States, which gained  speed significantly 
since 2005, responds direc tly to the EQF proposal and has cont ributed to the overall shift to a 
learning outcomes based approach in Europe.  
3. HIGH QUALITY LEARNING FOR EVERY STUDENT  
Better early learning opportunities (3.4 - 3.5) 
Member States committed themselves in 2002 to provide childcare to 90% of children 
between the age of 3 and compulsory school age
57. The Commission's proposed Employment 
Guidelines 2008-2010 note that securing childcare coverage of at least 90 % of children 
between 3 years old and the mandatory school age and at least 33 % of children under 3 years of age by 2010 is a useful benchmark. Guide line 18 invites Member States to promote a 
lifecycle approach to work through better rec onciliation of work and private life and the 
provision of accessible and affordable childcare facilities and care for other dependants. 
The growing awareness of the benefits of pre-sc hool education has given more impetus to that 
commitment. The Council Conclusions on efficien cy and equity in European education and 
training systems point out that pre-primary educ ation brings the highest rates of return over 
the whole lifelong learning process, es pecially for the most disadvantaged
58. The Staff 
Working Document supporting the Commission's Communication on this theme demonstrates 
'the positive effects of high quality pre-primary provision on children's intellectual and social behavioural development'
59. 
Rates of participation in pre-school education have increased over recent years, and a 
significant number of Member  States are already well beyond the Barcelona objective; 
however, the situation across the EU is very diverse, as shown in Chart 3.1: 
                                                 
56 Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on the establishment 
of the European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning, OJ C 111 of 6.5.2008. 
57 Barcelona European Council Conclusions (Spring 2002), p. 20. 
58 OJ C 298/3 of 8.12.2006. 
59 SEC (2006) 1096, pp.16-17. 
EN 25   EN Chart 3.1 Enrolment in pre-primary education  
Enrolment rates at ISCED leve ls 0 and 1 for 4-year olds 
2000 2006 p Country 
82.8 : EU-27 
100 100 France  
100 100 Italy  
99.2 i 100 i Belgium  
99 97.1 Spain  
100 95.5 Malta  
94.9 94 Luxembourg  
90.6 93.4 Denmark  
89.5 93.1 Germany  
81.4 92.8 Hungary  
100 91.3 United Kingdom 
81 86.5 Czech Rep. 
72.8 86.5 Sweden  
78.2 86.1 Estonia  
79.5 83.2 Austria  
72.3 80.6 Portugal  
67.7 79.3 Slovenia  
60.3 75.8 Romania  
99.5 74.2 Netherlands  
60.6 73.5 Latvia  
: 73.1 Slovakia  
55.7 70.4 Cyprus  
67 68.4 Bulgaria  
51 59.7 Lithuania  
53.9 56.1 Greece  
41.9 48.5 Finland  
: 48.2 Croatia  
51.1 i 46.9 i Ireland  
33 41.2 Poland  
12.4 15.9 FYR Macedonia  
: 7 Turkey  
90.9 94.8 Iceland  
: 52.7 Liechtenstein  
78.1 91.8 Norway  
   
  
  
 2000 
 2006 
  
Data source:  Eurostat (UOE data collection) 
(:) Missing or not available, (i) See in formation notes, (p) Provisional data 
(i) Some countries have participation ra tes of 100% or close for children aged 4 (as BE, FR, ES and IT where children 
typically start the school at the age of 3 (see also th e Eurydice publications on national education systems); 
BE: Data exclude independent private institutions. Data from the German speaking community is missing; 
IE: There is no official provisi on of education at ISCED level 0; 
Most research in the field to date has been unde rtaken in the United States. It has been argued 
that high quality early childhood educa tion and care provide one of the few  effective policy 
means of increasing social and economic opportunities for disadvantaged (minority) 
EN 26   EN communities and, therefore, for society as a whole60. Eurydice will shortly publish a broad 
overview of the existing evidence on this subject at European level61. 
High quality pre-school education and care has al so been found to foster the emergence of 
skills in the areas of language, literacy, math s and science, as well as supporting the 
development of young children’s l earning-related socio- emotional skills, in particular self-
regulation and social competence62. Investment in effectiv e high quality pre-school 
programmes for low income and ethnic mi nority children, who w ould otherwise be 
insufficiently prepared for school, seem s to be a specially powerful tool63. 
The OECD's project ‘Starting Strong’ also analys ed the social and educational returns of early 
educational intervention. It refe rs to the Perry pre- school study (US) that  shows the long term 
benefits, for both individuals and society, of  investment in early education. Education 
achievement levels at age 14 also seemed to  be particularly low for those who had not 
participated in some form of pre-school education64. 
In Europe, the UK project ‘Effective Provis ion of Pre-School Education’ (EPPE), a 
longitudinal (5-year) study investigating pre-sc hool settings, and a study by the European 
Agency for Development in Special Need s Education (EADSNE), both highlight the 
importance of social/behavioural, as well as cognitive, outcomes of early childhood education 
and care65. The forthcoming Eurydice study menti oned above reveals the most recent 
evidence on the long-term positive effects on so cial-emotional competence, self-regulation 
and intrinsic motivation.  
PISA 2003 results also showed a strong corre lation between pre-primary education and 
reading scores. Positive results were even more significant in the case of pupils with some 
form of disadvantage66. PIRLS 2006 showed a very strong co rrelation between the time spent 
in pre-primary education and achievement. Reading achievement clearly increased with the amount of time spent in pre- primary educational settings
67.  
Other studies emphasise the importance of qua lity in early-years provision. A European 
Childcare and Education study ba sed on longitudinal data from Austria, Germany and Spain 
found that the quality of childcare (particularly w ithin the family but also within institutions) 
                                                 
60 J. J. Heckman, 'Skills formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children', Science  
5278 (2006), pp. 1901-1902; J. J. Heckman, Invest in the very young , Centre of Excellence for Early 
Childhood Development (2004); J. J. Heckman, 'Investing in disadvantaged young children is an 
economically efficient policy' , Forum for building the economic case for investments in pre school 
(January 2006).  
61 Tackling social and cultural inequalities through early childhood education and care , Eurydice 
(forthcoming 2008). See also Starting Strong , I-II, OECD (2001, 2006) and Policy Brief, Lifelong 
learning and human capital , OECD (July 2007). 
62 M. M. McClelland, A. C. Acock, F. J. Morrison, 'T he impact of kindergarten learning related skills on 
academic trajectories at the end of elementary school', Early Childhood Research Quarterly  21 (2006), 
pp. 471-490. 
63 Ibid.; S. Berlinski, S. Galiani, P. Gertler, The Effect of Pre-Primary Education on Primary School 
Performance  (Feb, 2006); Investing in youth: an empowerment strategy , BEPA (2007). 
64 Starting Strong , II, OECD (2006), p.105. 
65 K. Sylva et al, The effective provision of pre-school educa tion (EPPE) project 1997-2004: Final report , 
DfES (2004); Early childhood intervention , Summary Report, EADSNE (2005). 
66 Cited in SEC(2007)1284, p. 27. 
67 Progress in international reading literacy. International report, PIRLS (2006), p.162. 
EN 27   EN was the most important predictor for almost a ll indicators of children's developmental status 
at age eight – more important th an the quality of the primary sc hool setting. This was the case 
for all socio-economic groups68.  
Promoting system equity  
(3.6) 
In its Communication on Efficiency and Equity  in European education and training systems69 
and its accompanying Staff Working Paper70, the Commission put forward evidence that, 
viewed in a wider perspect ive, equity and efficiency71 are mutually reinforcing. In its 
Conclusions on the subject, the Council, accordi ngly invited Member States to consider 
whether their present arrange ments for funding, governing and managing their education and 
training systems adequately refl ect the need to ensure both efficiency and equity, and to 
examine possible ways of improving them in or der to avoid the high costs of educational 
inequity72.  
Notwithstanding the importance of the efficiency  perspective, the concept of educational 
quality clearly cannot be reduced to the re lationship between input s (resources) and outputs 
(educational outcomes, often measured as resu lts in achievement tests). High quality school 
education does not necessarily al ways result in high scores in international achievement tests, 
for example when significant numbers of student s come from disadvantaged backgrounds, for 
which the school has not been able  to compensate completely.  
Quality cannot be judged by attainment levels in some subjects alone. The European 
Commission developed in 2000 a fr amework for assessing the quali ty of school education in 
Europe based on 16 indicators in five main quality areas73. This framework is based on 
indicators on attainment (in Mathematics,  Reading, Science, ICT, Foreign Languages, 
Learning to Learn and Civics),  on success and transition (drop- out rates, completion of upper 
secondary and participation in tertiary educ ation), on the monitoring of education (the 
evaluation and steering of sc hool education, parent partic ipation), and on resources and 
structures (education and training of teachers, pa rticipation in pre-primary, number of students 
per computer and educational expenditure per st udent). The framework therefore covers many 
of the dimensions involved in rais ing the quality of school education. 
                                                 
68 S. Power, Education , Policy  Synthesis of EU Research Results , Series N°.4. (2007), p. 22. 
69 COM(2006) 481 final. 
70 SEC(2006) 1096. 
71 Educational efficiency , is defined in the Staff Working Paper SEC(2006) 1096 (p. 6) as 'a measure of 
how resources/inputs allocated to the educational system (…) are converted into outputs for individuals (…) as well as for the economy and society'. Equ ity is described in the Communication (page 2, 
footnote 2) as 'the extent to which individuals can take advantage of education and training, in terms of 
opportunities, access, treatment and outcomes. Equitabl e systems ensure that th e outcomes of education 
and training are independent of socio-economic background and other factors that lead to educational 
disadvantage and that treatment reflects individuals’ specific learning needs'. 
72 OJ C 298/3 of 8.12.2006. 
73 European Report on the quality of school education: Sixteen quality indicators , European Commission 
(2000). 
EN 28   EN A recent study on the common char acteristics of most successful  school systems highlights 
the central role of setting high expe ctations for all students – and staff74. There is convergence 
among many analysts that successful educatio n systems should deliver transparent outcomes 
of a high calibre, evenly distributed across society75. 
However, in some Member States, the variat ion in achievement between schools can be as 
much as 1½ or even 2 times the OECD average76. On average across OECD countries, 
differences between schools account for 33% of the OECD average variance in the 
performance of 15-year-olds. Finland achieves not only the highest ove rall performance but 
has one of the lowest levels of variation in student performance (14% of the OECD average). 
Other countries in which performance is not cl osely related to the schools in which students 
are enrolled include Ireland, Denmark, Spai n, Poland, Sweden, Estonia and Latvia. By 
contrast in Germany, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Austria, Hungary, Netherlands, Belgium, Italy and Slovenia the variance in student perf ormance is between one and a half times and 
twice the OECD average
77. 
                                                 
74 M. Barber, M. Moursched, How the world’s best-performing sc hool systems come out on top , 
McKinsey & Co. (Sept. 2007), p. 27. 
75 See for example Explaining student performance , European Commission, (2005), p. 5. 
http://ec.europa.eu/education/ doc/reports/doc/basicskill.pdf ; H. Niemi, 'Equity and good learning 
outcomes', Paper presented at Finnish EU Presidency Conference (September 2006);  S. Field et al, No 
more failures. Ten steps to equity in education , OECD (2007). 
76 PISA 2006: Science Competen cies for Tomorrow’s World , OECD (2007) p .4 and p. 171. On unequal 
access to high-quality provision see also: Communi cation from the Commission to the Council the 
European Parliament the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Promoting young people's full participation in education, employment and society, COM (2007) 498, 
point 2 in particular. 
77 PISA 2006 , pp. 172-173. 
EN 29   EN An analysis of PISA 2006 data (Chart 3.2) shows the range of attainment levels and levels of 
impact of socio-economic background on student results between countries. 
Chart 3.2: Performance in science and th e impact of socio-economic background 
AustriaCzech Republic
United Kingdom
Denmark
PolandSpainFinland
Estonia
Ireland Sw eden
Latv ia
ItalyLithuania
GreecePortugalSlov akiaGermany
OECD Mean
OECD Mea nBulgaria
RomaniaLux embourgHungary
FranceBelgium Slov eniaNetherlands
300350400450500550600
0 10 20 30Percentage of variance in performance 
explained by the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (r-squared x 100)score
Below-average level of student performance in science
Below-average impact of socio-economic backgroundBelow-average level of student performance in science
Above-average impact of socio-economic backgroundAbove-average level of student performance in science
Above-average impact of socio-economic backgroundAbove-average level of student performance in science
Below-average impact of socio-economic background
 
Adapted from: PISA 2006, figure 4.10, p. 189. Data Source : OECD PISA 2006 database, Table 4.4a. 
(3.7) 
Guidance is an important tool for ensuring that  every student can follo w a learning pathway 
that responds to his or her needs. This is especi ally true at points of transition between stages 
of education, or between educat ion and vocational training systems.  The Council Resolution 
on strengthening policies, systems and practices  in the field of gui dance throughou t life in 
Europe stressed the importance of guidance in  schools and the role of guidance services in 
encouraging school completion, empowering indi viduals to manage their own learning and 
careers and in re-integrating early school leavers in appropr iate education and training 
programmes78. 
In a lifelong learning framework emphasis upon ac tive employability in the labour market 
poses new challenges to career guidance. It need s to shift from being largely available to 
selected groups, at particular points in life, to being much more widely available throughout 
the lifespan. Instead of helping people to ma ke immediate decisions it has to embrace a 
broader approach that also encompasses the development of career self-management skills, 
such as the ability to make and implement effective career decisions79. Research has shown 
                                                 
78 Resolution of the Council and of the representatives of the Member States meeting within the Council 
on strengthening policies, systems and practices in  the field of guidance throughout life in Europe 
9286/04 (May 2004). 
79 Career guidance and public policy: bridging the gap , OECD (2004), chapter 1.  
EN 30   EN that early career guidance within compulsory edu cation is beneficial. Students should learn to 
understand early how their choices, including deci sions about their school work, may affect 
their lives as adults. At later stages in co mpulsory schooling, career education programmes 
need to be closely and activel y linked to the world of work. There is strong case for more 
active involvement of parents, employers , former students and other community 
representatives, along w ith teachers, in school ca reer guidance programmes80. These 
principles are now being followed up by the Cl uster ‘Recognition of Learning Outcomes’ and 
a set of detailed European guidelines for validation are currently being developed81. These 
principles and guidelines are linked to a ‘Eur opean Inventory on validation of non-formal and 
informal learning’, providing technical information intended to support implementation of 
good practices in this field82.  
Alongside guidance, the validation of non-formal a nd informal learning is also crucial to the 
promotion of flexible learning pathways and equity. The Conclusions on the Common 
European Principles for the identification and validation of non-formal and informal learning 
emphasise the right of each individual to equal access and fair treatment and the obligation of 
stakeholders to provide guidan ce, counselling and information about these validation systems 
and approaches to individuals. They state th at the system of validation must be fair, 
transparent and underpinned by quality assura nce mechanisms, it should respect legitimate 
interests, ensure the balanced participation of relevant stak eholders, and that mechanisms 
should be in place to avoid conflict of interest83. 
(3.8) 
In relation to the early tracking of school student s (differentiating pupils at an early age into 
separate schools of different types on the basis of ability),  the Commission Staff Working 
Paper on Efficiency and Equity summari sed the evidence av ailable up to 200684. It concluded 
that when undertaken at ages 10 to 12, as is  common in several Euro pean school systems, 
tracking may exacerbate differences in educatio nal attainment due to social background, and 
thereby lead to even more in equitable outcomes in terms of student and school performance. 
This is partly because it tends to channel th e most disadvantaged towards less prestigious 
forms of education and training, while th e more advantaged have access to better 
opportunities.  
This is supported by a more recent study exam ining the relationship between accountability, 
autonomy, choice, equity and student performa nce which shows that, in countries where no 
selection takes place before age 15, the differe nce in performance betw een students with low- 
and high socio-economic status (SES) is of 65.0 test score point s. By contrast in countries 
                                                 
80 Ibid., chapter 3. 
81 DG EAC and CEDEFOP, 'Draft European Guidelines on validation of non-formal and informal 
learning'. Discussion paper presented to the conference ‘Valuing learning’ of the Portuguese 
Presidency, (November 2007). 
82 M. S. Otero, J. Hawley, A. M. Nevala (eds.), European inventory on validation of non-formal and 
informal learning , ECOTEC (2007). 
83 Conclusions of the Council and of the representatives of the Governments of the Member States 
meeting within the Council on the Common European Pr inciples for the identification and validation of 
non-formal and informal learning 9600/04 (May 2004). 
84 SEC (2006)1096, pp. 19-20. 
EN 31   EN where tracking takes place five years before the PISA testing age of 15, the difference 
between children of high and low SES can be up to 107.7 test score points.85 
There is, however, other recent evidence th at the effects of tracking may not all be 
detrimental. A study of the rela tionship between the le ngth of time spent in  a tracked system 
and young adults’ performance in standardized cognitive test scores found evidence of a positive performance effect of tracking
86. A second study based on cross-country analysis, 
produced mixed findings. On the one hand, it f ound that in countries in which tracking is 
undertaken later, the difference be tween the children of poorly a nd better educated parents in 
dropout rates and college enrolment or completion is smalle r than in countries in which 
tracking takes place early. On the other hand, it found that ea rly school tracking reduces the 
impact of family background on the level and on the coefficient of variation of literacy87. 
(3.9) 
In many countries, pupils who are deemed not to  have acquired an adequate mastery of the 
curriculum at the end of a school year may, at the discretion of  the school, be required to 
repeat the year. In Germany and Belgium, for ex ample, repeating a year is frequent: between 
20 and 50% of pupils repeat at some time duri ng compulsory education; in other countries 
pupils normally progress automatically from on e year to the next throughout compulsory 
education (see Chart 3.3). 
                                                 
85 G. Schütz, M. R. West and L. Wö βmann, 'School accountability, autonomy, choice, and the equity of 
student achievement from PISA 2003', OECD Working papers, EDU/WKP 9 (2007), pp. 32-33. 
86 K. Ariga, G. Brunello, 'Does secondary school tracking influence performance; Evidence from IALS' 
Discussion paper series No. 2643, Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit (2007), pp.1-16.  
87 G. Brunello, D. Checchi, ‘Does school tracking a ffect equality of opportunity? New international 
evidence’, Economic Policy  (October 2007), pp. 781-861. 
EN 32   EN Chart 3.3: Main official recommendation for th e progression to the next year during 
mainstream primary education (ISCED1) 2002/03 
 
Source:  Eurydice (2005): Key Data on education in Europe . 
Note: For detailed country regulations on progression see publication, p. 296. 
Research shows that the decision to make a st udent repeat a grade is not always based upon 
explicit and transparent criteria; thus, students with the same level of  performance may be 
required to repeat in one school or with one t eacher and not in another school or with another 
teacher88. In its 2007 report on primary education, the French High Council for Education 
points out that repetition rates are significantly higher for pupils of lower SES than for pupils 
with higher SES, and that teach ers’ children are required to re peat a year significantly less 
frequently than others. The Counc il concludes that 'precocious grade repeating is ineffective 
and contrary to the prin ciple of equal opportunities'89. 
Grade repetition is often considered by teacher s as a compensatory measure: giving pupils a 
second chance or more time to 'catch up'. Th ere is evidence to c ontradict this view. 
Hutmacher finds that while some repeaters catc h up, the vast majority does well in the first 
quarter of the repeated year only and then falls  back. The long term achievements of students 
who have repeated tend to be lo wer than for weak students who did not repeat. The effect of 
being labelled a ‘repeater’ can also have importa nt negative consequenc es for the student’s 
future school career90. 
One of the most comprehensive meta-analyses on this topic remains the work of Thomas 
Holmes, who in 1990 analysed 63 investigations comparing two groups of students: a control 
                                                 
88 G. Bless, P. Bonvin, M. Schüpbach : Le redoublement scolaire. Ses déterminants, son efficacité, ses 
conséquences  (2005), p.134. 
89 Haut Conseil de l’Education : L’école primaire. Bilan des résultats de l’école (2007) , p.16. 
90 W. Hutmacher : 'Quand la réalité résist e à la lutte contre l’échec scolaire' , Cahiers du service de la 
recherche sociologique , 36, (1993), pp. 37-38 and pp. 145-161. 
EN 33   EN group of non-repeating weak student s and a group of repeaters at different levels of primary 
school. His conclusion is unequivoca l: ‘Those who continue to reta in pupils at grade level do 
so despite cumulative research evidence show ing that the potential  for negative effects 
consistently outweighs positive outcomes’91. The OECD states that year repetition is often 
popular with teachers but that th ere is little evidence that it is beneficial for students. 
Repetition is expensive – ‘the full economic cost is up to 20 000 $US equivalent for each 
student who repeats a year’92. 
(3.10) 
Chart 3.4 shows the correlations betw een child poverty and attainment. 
Chart 3.4: At-risk-of-poverty-rate, by high est level of education attained 2006 (%) 
051015202530354045
EU (25 countries)
EU (15 countries)
Belgium
Czech Republic
Denmark
GermanyEstonia
Ireland GreeceSpain
FranceItaly
CyprusLatvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg HungaryMalta
Netherlands
Austria
Poland
Portugal
Slovenia
SlovakiaFinland
Sweden
United Kingdom
Pre-primary, primary and lower secondary education - levels 0-2 (ISCED 1997)
Upper secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education - levels 3-4 (ISCED 1997)
Tertiary education - levels 5-6 (ISCED 1997) 
Source : Eurostat (2007)  
Note: This indicator is defined as the share of persons with an equivalised disposable income below the risk-of-
poverty threshold, which is set at 60 % of the national median equivalised disposable income (after social 
transfers).  
                                                 
91 C. T. Holmes, 'Grade level retention effects: A Meta -analysis of research studies' in: L. A. Shepard, M. 
L. Smith (eds.), Flunking Grades. Research and policies on retention  (1990), pp. 16-33. Cited in J. J. 
Paul, Th. Troncin, 'Les apports de la recherche su r l’impact du redoublement comme moyen de traiter 
les difficultés scolaires au cours de la scolarité obligatoire' in: Haut Conseil de l’évaluation de l’école , 
N° 14 (2004). See also M. Crahay, 'Peut-on conclure à propos des effets du redoublement', Revue 
Française de Pédagogie , 148 (2005), p.14 ; and M. Crahay, Peut-on lutter contre l'échec scolaire?  
(2007). 
92 S. Field et al, No more failure. Ten steps to equity in education , OECD (2007), Chapter 4, pp. 91-92. 
EN 34   EN The Commission's Bureau of European Policy A dvisors (BEPA) recently reported that poor 
children experience a disproportionate share of deprivation, disadvantage, bad health and bad 
school outcomes. When they grow up, they are more likely to become unemployed, to get low 
paid jobs, to live in social housing, to get in tro uble with the police, and are at a greater risk of 
alcohol and drug abuse as young a dults. Moreover, in most c ountries, they are likely to 
transfer their poverty of opportuni ties to their own children. This has an economic, social and 
political cost which should be set against the public expenditure costs of early interventions 
(assuming such interventions can be made effective) to reduce the risks of future negative outcomes and social exclusion
93. 
A recent report by BEPA on empowering youth hi ghlights the following main areas in which 
action is required across the Eu ropean Union: invest early;  combine social and economic 
goals; co-ordinate investment across policy areas and layers; and improve information 
gathering and dissemination to  facilitate decision-making94. 
(3.11 - 3.12) 
The Cluster ‘Social Inclusion’ has emphasi sed the importance of mapping and improving 
preventive measures to combat disadvantage,  the need to avoid a very high turnover of 
teachers, and to ensure that well-trained and experienced teachers are attracted to work in 
‘disadvantaged’ schools95. 
Nevertheless schools cannot bri ng about change without change  in the wider society. Shavit 
and Blossfeld showed that, in the 13 countries th ey studied, no attempts to redress educational 
inequalities solely through education policy had succeeded, and that the only two countries 
that had reduced inequalities had done so through the medium of wider social policies96. 
Anyon, in the USA, argues that while rules an d regulations regarding teaching, curriculum, 
and assessment are clearly important, they cannot  be effective without policies to eliminate 
poverty-wage work and housing segregation (for  example) whose consequences for urban 
education are at least as profound as curriculum, pedagogy, and testing97. 
Early School Leaving  
(3.13 - 3.14) 
Early school leaving is defined as persons aged  between 16 and 24 leavin g education with no 
more than lower secondary education, and curren tly participating in no form of education and 
training. The Commission's Sta ff Working Paper on efficiency  and equity in European 
education and training systems gave an overview of literature on the costs of inequity and 
                                                 
93 R. Liddle, F. Delais, Europe's social reality . A consultation paper from BEPA ( 2006); See also: A 
thematic study to identify what policy responses are successful in preventing child poverty, European 
Commission, (2006); Study on access to education and training, basic skills and early school leavers, 
European Commission, (2005) p. 9. http://ec.europa.eu/education/ doc/reports/doc/earlyleave.pdf ; 
Cluster on Access and Social Inclusion;, Joint Report on Social Protection and Social Inclusion , 
European Council 7274/08 (2008), ; http://register.consilium.europa.eu/ pdf/en/08/st07/st07274.en08.pdf  
94 Investing in youth: an empowerment strategy , BEPA (April 2007). 
95 Discussed at the Education Council meeting of 14.02.2008: 
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms _Data/docs/pressData/en/educ/98734.pdf. 
96 Y. Shavit, H. P. Blossfeld, Persistent inequality. Changing educational attainment in thirteen countrie s 
(1993). 
97 J. Anyon, Radical possibilities: public policy, urban education, and a new social movement  (2006). 
EN 35   EN early school leav ing in Europe98. The above-mentioned BEPA study on youth empowerment 
provided further evidence about the costs of early school leaving99. Comprehensive 
comparative data for the EU are however still lacking.  
Reducing the rate of ea rly school leaving to no more than  10% in 2010 is one of the five 
benchmarks for monitoring the progress of European education and training systems 
established by the European Counc il in 2002. In most Member Stat es the percenta ge of early 
school leavers decreased between 2000 and 2006, but progress is not sufficient to reach the benchmark
100. The latest (2007) average figure for early  school leavers in the EU (14.8%) is 
still far in excess of the benchmark (see Chart 3.5). 
                                                 
98 SEC (2006) 1096, pp.12-13. 
99 Investing in youth: an empowerment strategy , BEPA (2007), pp. 31-32. 
100 SEC(2007)1284, pp. 29-35.  
EN 36   EN  
Chart 3.5: Early School Leavers, 2000 and 2007 
(Percentage of the population aged 18-24 with only lower secondary education  
and not in education or training, 2000 and 2007) 
2000 2007 Country 
17.6 14.8 EU-27 
12.5 12.3 Belgium  
: 16.6 Bulgaria  
: : Czech Republic 
11.6 12.4 Denmark  
14.9 12.7 Germany  
14.2 14.3 Estonia  
: 11.5 Ireland  
18.2 14.7 Greece  
29.1 31.0 Spain  
13.3 12.7 France  
25.3 19.3 Italy  
18.5 12.6 Cyprus  
: 16.0 Latvia  
16.7 8.7 Lithuania  
16.8 15.1 Luxembourg  
13.8 10.9 Hungary  
54.2 37.6 Malta  
15.5 12.0 Netherlands  
10.2 10.9 Austria  
: 5.0 Poland  
42.6 36.3 Portugal  
22.3 19.2 Romania  
: 4.3 Slovenia  
: 7.2 Slovakia  
8.9 7.9 Finland  
7.7 : Sweden  
18.4 : United Kingdom 
: 3.9 Croatia  
: : FYR Macedonia  
58.8 47.6 Turkey  
29.8 : Iceland  
: : Liechtenstein  
13.3 : Norway  
   
 
 
Data Source:  Eurostat (EU-Labour Force Survey 2008)  
Additional Notes:  
Provisional 2007 data for Latvia, Portugal and Finland. 
Unreliable data for Slovenia and Croatia because of the small sample size. 
Break in series for Finland (2000) and Denmark (2007). 
Cyprus: pupils studying abroad are not covered by the survey; this indicator is therefore overestimated . 
Most research identifies a combination of  several reasons, ranging from individual 
characteristics, education and job related reasons , family and peer relations to community and 
environmental reasons for early school leav ing. An extensive study for the European 
EN 37   EN Commission in 2005 made clear that overall so cio-economic background is one of the main 
determinants of early school leaving101. 
A Commission study on policy measures concer ning disadvantaged youth also examined 
good practice to combat early school leaving102. General measures, such as extending the age 
of compulsory education, removing mechanisms  of selection or curricular reforms were 
examined, as well as school-related measures su ch as counselling, su pport teaching or the 
combination of non-formal learning. The study ma de the distinction between preventative and 
compensatory measures such as second chance  schools. While both ha ve a role to play, 
attention is increasingly shifting towards how to prevent early school leaving. 
Eight Member States (Belgium, Estonia, Greece, Lithuania, Ma lta, the Netherlands, Portugal 
and Spain) set national targets for reducing ea rly school leaving in th eir 2005 Lisbon National 
Reform Programmes. The accompanying initiative s are not focused only on curricula, but also 
on extracurricular activities such as sport. The countries taking action in this field are not only 
those with a high proportion of ea rly school leavers but also thos e which have been successful 
in the past in reducing or limiting the phenomenon103. 
Special Educational Needs (SEN) 
(3.18) 
The concept of special educational needs is br oad and varies from country to country. It 
extends beyond those who may be included in 'handicapped' categories to cover those who 
have many other kinds of special need. The am ount and type of additional support for these 
groups also varies greatly from country to country. Given that the way in which SEN are 
defined, and consequently th e types of provision availabl e differ by country, direct 
comparisons between countries of the percentages of pupils in separate provision are not 
appropriate. However, trends in the proportion of pupils educated separately are a useful 
indication of developments towards in clusion for SEN pupils (see Chart 3.6). 
                                                 
101 Study on access to education and training, basic sk ills and early school leavers: Early school leavers , 
European Commission (2005) http://ec.europa.eu/education/ doc/reports/doc/earlyleave.pdf   
102 Thematic study on policy measures concerning disadvantaged youth, European Commission (2005) 
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/social_inclusion/docs/youth_study_en.pdf   
103 SEC(2007)1284, p. 33. 
EN 38   EN Chart 3.6: Percentage of pupils in compulsory education  
with special needs in segre gated settings, 1999/2001 – 2004/2006 
 
Data source: European Agency for Development in Special  Needs Education and Eurydice for 1999-2001; 
European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education for 2004-2006. 
Additional note: EU average calculated as arithmetic average of EU Member States for which data are available.  
With very few exceptions, these trends show only very moderate change and no clear pattern 
emerges in Europe. The number of countries showing an increase in  the proportion of SEN 
pupils in separate provision is similar to thos e showing a decrease, wi th several countries 
showing no changes, or almost none, in these proportions over this time period104. 
Several political documents have argued in th e last decade for the benefits of inclusive 
education for children with sp ecial educational needs. The Salamanca Statement in 1994 
(signed by 92 governments and 25  organisations), inter alia, called upon all governments to 
'adopt as a matter of law or policy the principl e of inclusive educati on, enrolling all children 
in regular schools, unless there are compelling reasons for doing otherwise'105.  
In September 2007 a European Hearing attend ed by young people with special educational 
needs from 29 countries, from secondary, vocati onal and higher education, in the framework 
of the Portuguese Presidency of the Council, re sulted in a declaration stating 'it is very 
important to give everyone the freedom to choose where they want to be educated; inclusive 
education is best if th e conditions are right fo r us; we see a lot of benefits in inclusive 
education: we acquire more soci al skills; we live wider expe riences; we learn about how to 
manage in the real world; we need to have a nd interact with friends with and without special 
needs; inclusive education with individualised, specialised support is th e best preparation for 
higher education; specialised centres would be of help to support us and to inform universities 
properly about the help we require; inclusive edu cation is mutually beneficial to us and to 
everyone'106. 
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was adopted on 13 
December 2006 and declares that 'persons with disabilities can access an  inclusive, quality 
                                                 
104 Ibid.: Between 1999 and 2006, no overall progress was made towards greater inclusion of pupils with 
special needs; the proportion of such pupils educated  in special settings decreased in 11, but increased 
in 12 out of 25 countries. 
105 Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education ( 1994), p. ix. 
106 Lisbon Declaration: Young People's Views on Inclusive Education, (2007), p.1. 
EN 39   EN and free primary education and secondary educa tion on an equal basis with others in the 
communities in which they live.'  
In 2007 a Declaration of the European Parlia ment called for a charter on 'dys' children 
(defined as children with disability such as dysphasia, dyspraxia, dyslexia, dyscalculia or 
attention deficit disorder, etc.). The purpose of such charter would be to: promote best 
practice in making information accessible for pe ople with disabilities, promote the use of 
effective pedagogies and early intervention stra tegies; and promote the integration of such 
children into the world of work107. 
A literature review by the European Agency fo r Development in Special Needs Education has 
sought to map good classroom practices on incl usive education in primary and secondary 
settings by collecting existing practices an d analysing their impact. The practices it 
investigated were: c ooperative teaching, peer tutoring a nd cooperative learning, curriculum- 
based measurement, collaborative problem solving and mixed designs108.  
To date, quantitative informati on about the benefits of inclusiv e education for all is scarce. 
Further analysis is needed. In a recent publica tion on SEN students the OECD pointed out that 
so far the work on SEN students has been determined by the availability of data109. However, 
for future comparative work it is crucial to co llect systematically economic data and data on 
outcomes for SEN students. The publication also cal ls for the need to include SEN students in 
the future rounds of PISA. OECD  has recently started a new study that aims to examine issues 
of transition of SEN students into further and higher educati on and the labour market. Within 
the context of transitions OECD is also planning  to focus in the future on the question of how 
enabling or disabling schools are in  securing the continuity of th e education of SEN students.  
School development 
(3.19 - 3.21) 
Effective school improvement is high on most countries’ educational agenda110.  
A recent European research project conducted  an extensive analysis of some 30 school 
improvement projects in eight countries (T he Netherlands, Finland, United Kingdom, 
Belgium-French Community, Gr eece, Italy, Spain, and Portugal)111. The research showed that 
the accent is often on teacher quality, which is certainly an important factor; but individual 
teachers cannot in isolation produce high levels of  performance for all students of a school nor 
promote lasting changes within th eir schools. It is esse ntial to consid er the school as a whole, 
i.e. as an organisation. The organisation may add or subtract  value to that of its individual 
members. The study claims that outside pressure is needed for schools to change. It distinguished four main types: market mech anism, external evaluation and accountability, 
                                                
 
107 Written declaration of the European Parliament on "dys" crimination and social exclusion affecting 
children with "dys" abilities, (0064/2007). 
108 C.J.W Meier, Inclusive education and effective classroom practices , EADSNE (2001), pp. 31-32.  
109 Students  with disabilities, learning d ifficulties and disadvantages. Policies, statistics and indicators , 
OECD (2007), pp. 215-224. 
110  Also at the level of the European Schools, re form of their governance arrangements is currently 
underway and access to the European Baccalaureat  is being widened to other school types. 
111 See project within the fourth EU framework programme for research: 'Capacity for change and 
adaptation of schools in the case of effective school improvement' (July 2001). 
http://www.pjb.co.uk/npl/bp27.htm   
EN 40   EN external agents, such as inspectors, and participation of society in education and societal 
changes. Schools – and indeed school edu cation systems - are often not organised 
appropriately to respond to a fast-changing environment . The study identified three material 
and non-material kinds of support that might contribute to school improvement: granting a 
certain level of autonomy to schools, financia l resources and working conditions and local 
support from parents, distri ct officials, school admini strators and school boards. 
Increasingly, the evidence points to the potenti al of 'learning communities' to generate the 
capacity for school improvement. Such communiti es offer opportunities for teachers to work 
together without being dependent upon ex ternal initiatives or interventions112. However, much 
depends upon a school’s internal capacity to beco me a learning community in the first place. 
It is clear that not all schools have this cap acity, suggesting that t hose schools which would 
benefit most from teachers working together may be those least able to make this happen. 
Recent studies therefore emphasise that school improvement programmes have to be related 
to capacity building; thus there should be more emphasis on sophisticated training, coaching 
and development programmes for practitioners  and the use of external support agencies113. 
They emphasise that schools and school syst ems facing organisational challenges emphasise 
in one way or another that real change in schools requires the development of strong 
professional communities114. Two ways of building cap acity are through internal 
collaboration or school-t o-school collaboration115. 
Several European research projects on school effectiveness suggest that a combination of 
external mechanisms and institutional autono my is most effective in bringing about 
improvements in local contexts116. The importance of local and national contexts is such that 
there is unlikely to be a sing le recipe for change. Moreover,  even with the appropriate 
framework of external mechan isms, improvement takes time117. These conclusions are 
confirmed by the result s of the ESI (Effective School Improvement) survey118.  
Much research emphasises the important role of  parents and the wider social community in 
school improvement119. 
                                                 
112 See report of the Cluster ‘Teachers and Trainers’:  'Schools as learning comm unities for their teachers.' 
http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/reportpeer2_en.pdf  
113 A. Harris, C. Chapman , Effective leadership in schools facing challenging circumstances  (2002); L. 
Stool, D. Fink , Changing our schools: linking school effectiveness and school improvement  (1996). 
114 See the policy conclusions of the Cluster ‘Teachers and Trainers’ http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/  
2010/doc/reportpeer5_en.pdf ; see also K. S. Louis –S. Kruse (eds.): Professionalism and community : 
Perspectives on reforming urban schools (1995); L Stoll, K. Seashore Louis, Professional learning 
communities  (2007), and R. Bolam et al (eds.), Creating and sustaining professional learning 
communities, Research Report (2005);  J. Cibulka, S. Coursey, M. Nakayama, J. Price, S. Stewart, 
Schools as learning organisations: A review of the literature , NCSL, UK, (2003). 
115 See A. Bolivar, 'Capacity-building as a means to  empower schools', Paper presented at the EU 
presidency conference on 'Schools facing up to new challenges' (November 2007) P. M. Senge, The 
fifth discipline. The art and practice of the learning organisation  (1990); R. Glatter, 'Schools and school 
systems facing complexity: organisational challenges', Paper presented at the EU presidency conference 
in Lisbon on 'Schools facing up to new challenges in the 21st century' (November 2007). 
116 S. Power, Education. Policy Synthesis of EU research results . Series N° 4 (2007), p. 24. 
117 Ibid. 
118 Survey conducted across three co untries: UK, Spain, Netherlands. 
119 J. S. Coleman, 'Social capital in the creation of human capital', American Journal of Sociology 
Supplement  94 (1988); R. D. Putman, 'Education, diversity, social cohesion and 'social capital' – note 
EN 41   EN The project 'Legal Framework for New Govern ance and Modern Policy Education throughout 
Europe' sought to identify the impact of new accountability mechan ism on schools through a 
comparative study of 26 national systems base d on expert accounts, analysis of legal 
frameworks and questionnaire survey. It found th at systemic and cyclical self evaluation 
appears to be an effective t ool for providing schools with the means of identifying areas of 
improvement and directions for change120. 
(3.22) 
The complementary nature of external and in ternal evaluation raises  important questions 
about who the players are, who se ts the standards for the proce dures and what happens to the 
findings (see Chart 3.7). The general tendency  is to introduce extern al evaluation involving 
judgements about performance and means, and inte rnal evaluation for deve loping strategies to 
improve the current situation, while either appr oach may identify precise ly those aspects that 
require improvement. 
Chart 3.7: Relations between the internal and ex ternal evaluation of schools as entities, 
compulsory general education, 2002/03  
Source:  Eurydice (2005): Key Data on Education in Europe.  
Note: for details on evaluation approaches in different countries see publication. 
A recent Eurydice study on school autonomy attempted to make correlations between 
autonomy and accountability (see Chart 3.8). It notes that from the middle of the 1990s the concept of accountability became increasingly important and assumed different forms in 
different countries. These new models of accoun tability usually represent an adjustment of 
                                                                                                                                                        
 
for discussion', OECD Education Ministers meeti ng Dublin 'Raising the quality of learning for all' 
(March 18-19, 2004). 
120 S. Power, Education , Policy Synthesis of EU research results . Series N° 4 (2007), p. 23. 
EN 42   EN evaluation instruments that were either already in place (school inspectorates, for example) or 
were developed to meet broader objectives, such as standardized assessment of pupil 
attainment.  
Chart 3.8: Publication of findings from th e external evaluation of schools,  
compulsory general education 2006/07 
Source : Eurydice (2007): School autonomy in Europe. Policies and measures.  
The study concludes that, 'supervision by inspect orates or organising bodies (including local 
authorities) or the monitoring of results (in particular the results of pupils in standardised tests) do not equate to a particular degree of autonomy. Countries with a high level of 
autonomy (Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Sw eden, etc.) draw on all these different 
types of control. This diversity is explained by the fact that tr aditional methods of supervision 
(inspection of teachers for example) have  been adapted to accommodate the new 
responsibilities delegated to schools'
121.  
It is rare for countries to have developed, as in the United Kingdom (England), accountability 
measures in tandem with school autonomy policie s and in relation to th e degree of freedom 
granted. However, all countries  where there is a high level of  autonomy have developed forms 
of accountability which vary consid erably in their leve l of control. Conver sely, the countries 
which do not have a structured  model of school evaluation ar e those where school autonomy 
reforms have been developed fairly recently, only partially or are weak (Bulgaria, Greece, France, Italy, etc.). However, this approach to  accountability has begun to emerge in a few of 
                                                
 
121 School autonomy in Europe. Policies and measures , Eurydice (2008), p. 46.  
EN 43   EN these countries. Italy, for example, has recently  decided to develop evaluation instruments to 
measure the value added by each school in terms of pupil attainment'122. 
Recent studies on the relationship between scho ol accountability, autonomy, choice, equity, 
and student achievements, suggest that school autonomy may be more be neficial in systems 
where external exams introduce accountability and external exams change the behaviour not only of students, but also of teachers and school
123. The analysis of the 2006 PISA results 
seems to corroborate this result. Further res earch is needed to determine the precise 
mechanisms at work.  
4. TEACHERS AND SCHOOL STAFF  
Teacher Competences and Qualifications (4.1 – 4.2) 
Within the Education and Training 2010 work  programme, a group of national experts on 
teacher and trainer education prepared ‘C ommon European Principles for Teacher 
Competences and Qualifications’, a statement of basic principles on the competences and 
qualifications required by teachers and traine rs. This was validated by a Stakeholder 
conference in July 2005
124.  
Following on from this work, the European  Commission in August 2007 published a 
Communication ‘Improving the Qual ity of Teacher Education’125. This identified the quality 
of teaching and Teacher Educa tion as key factors in securing the quality of education and 
improving the educational attainment of young people.  
The Commission’s proposals were based upon re search showing, inter alia, that: teacher 
quality is the most import ant within-school factor a ffecting student performance126; there are 
positive relationships between in-service training and student achievement127; the amount of 
in-service training available to practising teachers in the EU is very limited, generally amounting to less than 20 hours per year; only half  of Member States offer new teachers any 
systematic kind of support in th eir first years of teaching; a nd that explicit frameworks to 
                                                
 
122 Ibid.  
123 L. Wö βmann, 'The complementarity of central exams and school autonomy: economic theory and 
international evidence', in: J. de Groof, C. Gle nn, E. Gori, D. Vidoni (eds.), ‘Quality control, 
accountability and liab ility in education’ (2005) ; idem, 'Contribution of E ducation and Training to 
innovation and growth', Paper presented at the Sympos ium on the future perspectives of Education and 
Training for growth, jobs and social cohesion (June 2007); G. Schütz, M. R. West, L. Wö βmann, 
'School accountability, autonomy, choi ce, and the equity of student achievement from PISA 2003', 
OECD Working papers, EDU/WKP 9 (2007). 
124 Common European Principles for Teach er Competences and Qualifications 
http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/principles_en.pdf  
125 COM(2007)392 final. 
126 S. G. Rivkin, E. A. Hanushek, J. F. Kain , 'Teachers, schools and academic achievement', National 
Bureau of Economic Research  (2000); E. A. Hanushek, J. F. Kain , S. G. Rivkin , 'Teachers, schools, 
and academic achievement' , Econometrica , 73/ 2 (March, 2005), pp. 417–458  
127 J. D. Angrist, V. Lavy, 'Does teacher trai ning affect pupil learning? Evidence from matched 
comparisons in Jerusalem public schools?', Journal of Labor Economics , 19/ 2 (Apr., 2001), pp. 343-
369. 
EN 44   EN assist teachers who experience difficulties in performing their duties adequately exist in only 
one third of countries128.  
The Communication made proposals to: ensure th at provision for teachers' education and 
professional development is coordinated, coherent , and adequately resourced; ensure that all 
teachers possess the knowledge, attitudes and pe dagogic skills that they require to be 
effective; support the professionalisation of teac hing; promote a culture of reflective practice 
and research within the teaching profession; an d promote the status and recognition of the 
profession. The Communication was the basis for the subsequent Council Conclusions on the 
same topic129. 
Within the Education and Training 2010 progr amme, work on Teacher Education is being 
carried forward by the Cluster ‘Teachers and Trai ners’, who publish detail ed reports of their 
peer-learning activities, and conclusions about policies for improving Teacher Education130.  
The Commission Staff Working Document ‘T owards more knowledge-based policy and 
practice in education and training’ emphasised t eachers’ roles in the creation and application 
of knowledge131. It advocated that teachers should receive adequate training in research 
methods, and incentives to undert ake research and action resear ch throughout their careers, 
seeing this as part of pr ofessional good practice.  
The Commission in 2006 commissioned a study on the mobility of teachers and trainers in the 
European Union132. The study identifies, for each country, the number of teaching posts 
(FTE) in 2004133 and the age and gender profile of  the teaching profession is analysed134. The 
study also identifies the trends in  teacher numbers based upon a num ber of factors. It predicts 
the likely effects of different policy scenarios on those numbers135. Data on the age profile of 
the teaching profession in each country are pr ovided by Eurostat. On average in EU Member 
States, 30% of teachers are in the over-50 ag e group. This equates to some 1,972,271 teachers 
who can be expected to need to be replaced over the next 10 to 15 years. 
(4.4) 
A recent study by McKinsey & Co. on the common characteristics of most successful school 
systems highlights the central role of teachers,  asserting that ‘the quality of an education 
system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers’ and that ‘the only way to improve outcomes is to improve instruction’
136. The OECD's thematic review on the teaching profession 
emphasised the importance of the quality of t eaching, the need to align teacher development 
and performance better with school needs, and the need to transform teaching into a 
                                                 
128 Key data on Education in Europe , Eurydice (2005), pp. 185-232. 
129 OJ C 300/07 of 15.11.2007. 
130 Teacher and Trainer Education: Policy conclusions and recommendati ons from peer learning activities 
2005 – 2007; http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/objectives_en.html  
131 SEC(2007)1098, p. 55. 
132 Mobility of teachers and trainers . A report submitted by GHK to the European Commission (2006) 
http://ec.europa.eu/education/doc/reports/doc/mobility.pdf. 
133 Ibid., Table 3.2, p. 21. 
134 Ibid., Section 3.4, from p. 25 onwards and annexes. 
135 Ibid., Section 8, from p. 156 onwards. 
136 M. Barber, M. Moursched, How the world’s best-performing sc hool systems come out on top , 
McKinsey & Co. (Sept. 2007). 
EN 45   EN knowledge-rich profession. It also  underlined that it is crucia l that schools have genuine 
responsibility for teacher personal management in which leadership plays a crucial role137. 
Chart 4.1 shows that teacher quality has a sign ificant effect on student performance, more 
than any other variable. On average, the perf ormance of two students of average performance 
(50th percentile) diverged by more  than 50 percentile points over a three year period 
depending on the teacher they were assigned.  
Chart 4.1: The effect of teacher quality 
 *Among the top 20% of teachers. **Among the bottom 20% of teachers 
Source:  Sanders and Rivers (2007), Cumulative and Residual  Effects on Future Student Academic Achievement, 
cited in M. Barber, M. Moursched, How the world’s best-performing sc hool systems come out on top , McKinsey 
& Co. (Sept. 2007), p. 11. 
As far as the quality of teachers and teaching are concerned, the study notes that in the top 
performing systems: there are multiple pathways into the teaching profe ssion; low performing 
teachers are removed from the classroom; there are effective mechanisms for allocating places 
on teacher training programmes to well-motivat ed high achievers with good communication 
skills; starting remuneration is in  line with other graduates’ starting salaries; the status of the 
profession is carefully managed. Effective a nd successful systems promote good interaction 
between teachers and students by: coaching cl assroom practice, developing strong school 
leaders and enabling teachers  to learn from each other138.  
                                                 
137 Teachers matter: attracting, developing  and retaining effective teachers , OECD (2005). 
138 M. Barber, M. Moursched, How the world’s best-performing sc hool systems come out on top , 
McKinsey & Co. (Sept. 2007), p. 38. 0th percentile 53 percentile points 
37th percentile 50th percentile 100th percentile 
90th percentile Student 
performance 
Age 8 Age 11 Student with high-performing* teacher 
Student with low-performing** teacher 
EN 46   EN School Leadership  
(4.5 - 4.6) 
Several studies on school improvement  point to the fact that effective leadership is central in 
implementing and sustaining school improvement139. Those studies that see a close 
relationship between effective school leadership  and student outcomes advocate the need for 
developing shared vision, distri buting leadership and building the school cu lture necessary to 
current restructuring efforts in schools140. 
The recent OECD study Improving School Leadership: Policy and Practice  identifies four 
core functions for leadership: supporting, ev aluating and developing teacher quality; goal 
setting, assessment and accountability; strategi c resource management; leadership beyond 
school borders141. 
Leadership in this context is primarily about managing the conditions under which people 
learn new practices; creating or ganisations that are supportive,  coherent environments for 
successful practice; and developing leadersh ip skills of others. Elmore explains how 
leadership might be defined more clearly as a collective good; it should be treated as a human 
investment enterprise, which has three important  characteristics: it focuses on the practice of 
improving the quality of instructio n and the performance of students;  it treats leadership as a 
distributed function rather than  a role based activity, and it requires more or less continuous 
investment in knowledge and skills142.  
Senge views leadership and leaders at the cent re of the learning orga nisation where they are 
designers, stewards and teachers143. 
For Hopkins, ‘system leaders' are those head -teachers who are willing to shoulder system 
leadership roles: who care about and work for the success of other schools as well as their own
144. 
The OECD concludes that 'eviden ce shows that principals have a measurable, mostly indirect 
influence on learning outcomes'145. This implies that the impact  of school leaders on student 
                                                 
139 D. Vidoni, L. Grassetti, C. Bezzina, D. Gattelli (eds.), The role of school leadership on student 
achievement: evidence from TIMSS 2003 , unpublished (2007), pp. 33-39. It gives an overview of the 
literature on the subject since the 1960s. 
140 K. Leithwood, D. Jantzi, R. Steinbech , Changing leadership for changing times  (1999) 
141 Improving school leadership , OECD (2008), pp. 32-48. 
142 R. F. Elmore, 'Leadership as the practice of improvement' Paper presented at the International 
Conference of OECD, 'International perspectives on school leadership for systemic improvement' (July 
2006). 
143 P. Senge, The fifth discipline. The art and practice of the learning organisation (1990), p. 340. 
144 D. Hopkins, 'Short prim er on system leadership',  Paper presented at the International Conference of 
OECD, ‘International perspectives on school leadership for systemic improvement’ (July 2006), p.8.; 
Ibid., p. 13. see D. Hopkins (ed.), Innovative approaches to contemporary school leadership , 
OECD,(forthcoming), and the system leadership series led by Professor Hopkins on 
http://www.ssatinet.net/events/futur eevents/systemleadershipseries.aspx  
145 Improving school leadership , OECD (2008), p. 8. and P. Hallinger, R. Heck, 'Exploring the principal’s 
contribution to school effectiveness: 1980- 1995', School Effectiveness and School Improvement , 9 
(1998), pp. 157-191. 
EN 47   EN learning is generally mediated by other people, events and or ganisational factors such as 
teachers, classroom practices and school climate.  
According to Spillane et al. distributed leader ship incorporates the activities of multiple 
groups of individuals in a school guiding and m obilising staff in the instructional change 
process through inter-dependenc y rather than dependency146. 
Silins and Mulford conclude that student outcomes are more likely to improve where 
leadership sources are distributed throughout the school community and where teachers are 
empowered in areas of importance to them. They  argue that teachers ca nnot create and sustain 
the conditions for the productive development of children if those conditions do not exist for 
teachers. If schools are to become better at pr oviding learning for students, they must also 
become better at providing opportunities for teachers to innovate, develop and learn 
together147. 
Timperley and Spillane have i nvestigated links be tween distributed le adership and school 
success148. They suggest that while traditional a pproaches to leadership recommend that 
organisational and instructional coherence can be established by creati ng a strong vision for a 
school that pervades the organi sational culture, distributed lead ership focuses on the things 
people do to enact those visi ons and create coherence. 
                                                 
146 J. Spillane, R. Halverson, J. Diam ond, 'Towards a theory of school lead ership practice: implications of 
distributed perspective', Journal of Curriculum Studies  36/1 (2004), pp. 3-34. 
147 H. Silins, B. Mulford, 'Leadership and schools results', in: K. Leithwood, P. Hallinger (eds.) , Second 
international handbook of educational leadership and administration ( 2002), pp. 561-612.  
148 J. Spillane, Distributed leadership  (2006); H. S. Timperly, 'Distribut ed leadership: developing theory 
from practice' , Journal of Curriculum Studies  37/4,( 2005), pp. 395-420; H. Timperley, A. Wilson, H. 
Barrar, I. Fung, Teacher professional learning and devel opment: best evidence synthesis iteration  
(2007).