COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT   Accompanying document to the   Proposal for a   COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION  on policies to reduce early school leaving
Date: 2011-01-31
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, dropout, education, education policy, impact study, report

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 31.1.2011 
SEC(2011) 97 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Accompanying document to the 

Proposal for a  

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION 

on policies to reduce early school leaving 

SEC(2011) 98 final 
SEC(2011) 96 final 
COM(2011) 19 final 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. 

1.1. 

1.2. 

1.3. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

2.3. 

2.4. 

3. 

Section 1: Procedural issues and consultation of interested parties............................. 4 

Organisation and timing............................................................................................... 4 

Consultation and expertise ........................................................................................... 5 

Political background .................................................................................................... 8 

Section 2: Problem definition ...................................................................................... 9 

Underlying drivers ..................................................................................................... 14 

EU right to act ............................................................................................................ 16 

Baseline scenario........................................................................................................ 17 

Policy requirements.................................................................................................... 18 

Section 3: Objectives ................................................................................................. 20 

3.1. 

Consistency of objectives with other EU policies ..................................................... 22 

4. 

4.1. 

4.2. 

4.3. 

4.4. 

4.5. 

5. 

5.1. 

5.2. 

5.3. 

5.4. 

5.5. 

6. 

7. 

Section 4: Policy options............................................................................................ 22 

Option A (baseline scenario)...................................................................................... 24 

Option B (Policy Framework).................................................................................... 24 

Sub-option B.1 (Commission Communication or Recommendation) ....................... 25 

Sub-option B.2 (Council Recommendation).............................................................. 25 

Option C (Funding programme) ................................................................................ 25 

Section 5: Analysis of impacts................................................................................... 26 

Discarded option ........................................................................................................ 26 

Option A: Baseline scenario ...................................................................................... 27 

Option B: Implementing a policy framework against ESL........................................ 28 

Sub-Option B.1: Commission Communication or Recommendation........................ 29 

Sub-option B.2: Council Recommendation ............................................................... 30 

Section 6: Comparing the options .............................................................................. 32 

Section 7: Monitoring and evaluation ........................................................................ 36 

7.1. 

Information and data on evaluating the success of the policy framework................. 38 

8. 

8.1. 

8.2. 

Annexes...................................................................................................................... 39 

Annex 1 – Description of a policy framework against ESL ...................................... 40 

Annex 2 – Summary of the results of public consultations ....................................... 44 

EN 

2 

   EN 

8.3. 

8.4. 

Annex 3 - Minutes of the Cluster Meeting 'Access and Social Inclusion', 17 May 
2010............................................................................................................................ 47 

Annex 4 – Minutes of the Stakeholder Platform Meeting, 14 June 2010 and list of 
participants ................................................................................................................. 51 

EN 

3 

   EN 

Leading Service: DG Education and Culture (EAC) 

Other involved services: DGs Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities (EMPL), 
Home Affairs (HOME), Research (RTD), Eurostat (ESTAT) and Secretariat-General (SG). 

WP reference: 2010/EAC/028 of the CLWP 

Roadmap: published on 1 July 2010 
(http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/planned_ia/docs/411_eac_recomm_early_school_leav
ing_en.pdf) 

1. 

SECTION 1: PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES 

1.1. 

Organisation and timing 

The  Recommendation  on  combating  early  school  leaving  (ESL)  is  included  in  the 
Commission's  work  programme  under  the reference 2010/EAC/028. It is foreseen to launch 
the  inter-service  consultation  in  October  2010  and  to  adopt  the  recommendation  by  end  of 
2010.  

The detailed  work  on  the impact  assessment started in April 2010. A  group of Commission 
Directorates General and Services was set up to monitor the work on the impact assessment 
(IA)  and  comment  on  the  draft  IA  report.  A  first  meeting  of  this  Steering  Committee  was 
convened  on  the  22  April  2010.  The  following  DGs  participated  in  the  group:  EMPL,  JLS, 
RTD,  ESTAT  and  SG.  DGs  Economic  and  Financial  Affairs  (ECFIN),  Regional  Policy 
(REGIO)  and  Health  and  Consumers  (SANCO)  were  also  invited  and  received  the  meeting 
documents for comments. 

Two further meetings were held on the 9 June 2010 and the 14 July 2010. The final draft of 
this report was discussed on 14 July 2010. The minutes of the meetings are annexed. 

The  first  version  of  the  IA  Report  was  discussed  by  the  IA  Board  on  22  September  2010. 
Following the recommendations of the IA Board, the report has been revised and includes the 
following additional information: 

•  Data  on  and  reasons  for  different  performances  in  reducing  ESL  rates  in  Member  States 

and key factors for success are included in section 2 (Problem definition). 

•  The shortcomings in policy development in the current baseline arrangements (OMC and 
NRP under Europe 2020) are described in more detail in section 2.3 (Baseline scenario). 

•  The objectives have been revised (section 3). 

•  The options in section 4 have been re-defined in order to focus more on the policy content. 

•  Information on the availability of data and information and the possibilities to acquire the 
necessary  information  for  more  evidence  based  policy  making  are  described  at  several 
points  throughout  the  report:  lack  of  data  and  information  (Section  2),  possibilities  to 
acquire better data and information (section 6). 

EN 

4 

   EN 

•  The  costs  related  to  data  and  information  gathering  as  well  as  the  costs  and  benefits  of 
introducing  evidence-based,  comprehensive  and  consistent  policies  against  early  school 
leaving are discussed in section 6. 

•  Annex 1 provides a description of the policy framework which would form the content of 

the draft Recommendation. 

Following the comments of the IA Board of 22 October 2010, the presentation of the policy 
options  has  been  clarified,  in  order  to  better  guide  the  reader.  Section  7  underlines  more 
strongly that the initiative will base its reporting and monitoring on the information gathered 
through the Europe 2020 reporting and monitoring process. A number of smaller comments 
have also been taken into account in revised drafting. 

1.2. 

Consultation and expertise 

DG  EAC  started  its  work  on  early  school  leaving  in  2006.  Under  the  Open  Method  of 
Coordination, a “Cluster” of experts from Member States specialising in "Access and Social 
Inclusion in Education" was set up within the work programme Education and Training 2010, 
adopted by the Council in 2003.1 This Cluster conducted peer-learning activities in Belgium 
(2006), Ireland (2007) and France (2007) focussing in particular on ESL and allowing for in-
depth reflections on efficient and effective policies against ESL. Other peer learning activities 
contributed also to the knowledge base on ESL, placing it in a wider perspective of measures 
to  support  disadvantaged  youth.  Specific  information  on  policies  against  ESL  was  collected 
from 11 countries (AT, CZ, FR, HU, IE, IT, LT, LU, ES, SE, TR). This information formed 
part of the empirical basis of the following analytical work. 

Special  Report  No  1/2006  of  the  Court  of  Auditors  on  the  contribution  of  European  Social 
Funds to combating early school leaving gave additional insight into the current situation and 
the policies of six Member States (ES, FR, IE, NL, PT, UK). Reducing early school leaving 
has  been  a  priority  supported  through  the  European  Social  Fund  (ESF)  and  the  experiences 
form  an  important  basis  for  policy  recommendations.  One  of  the  main  conclusions  of  the 
report  was  that  activities  within  Member  States  were  not  sufficiently  based  on  an  adequate 
analysis of the existing situation and were not sufficiently targeted. The report also noticed a 
lack  of  quantitative  evaluation  information  on  the  results  or  the  impact  of  the  different 
measures. These findings correlate strongly with the findings of the Cluster. 

Three  studies  on  ESL  launched  by  the  DG  EAC  in  2005  and  2009  completed  the  overall 
picture: 

•  Study on access to education and training, basic skills and early school leaving (2005), lot 
3  on  early  school  leaving  submitted  by  the  consulting  company  GHK  (UK).  The  report 
collected  and  compared  information  from  25  EU  Member  States  and  four  non-European 
countries.2 

1 

2 

Sixteen countries participated in the cluster 'Access and Social Inclusion in LLL': AT, BE, CZ, ES, FR, 
DE, GR, HU, IE, IT, LT, LU, LV, SE, RO, and TR. The cluster focussed its activities on the topic of 
educational  disadvantage  in  school  education,  early  school  leaving  and  access  to  early  childhood 
education and care. Between 2006 and 2010 it conducted 10 peer-learning activities and 11 meetings in 
Brussels. 
http://ec.europa.eu/education/pdf/doc284_en.pdf 

EN 

5 

   EN 

                                                 
•  Early School Leaving. Lessons from research for policy makers (2009), a report submitted 
by the Network of Experts in Social Sciences of Education (NESSE). The report provided 
an overview of current research on ESL.3 

•  Inclusion  and  education  in  European  countries  (2009),  INTEMEAS  consortium, 
coordinated  by  DOCA  Bureaus  (NL)  The  report  provided  information  on  10  European 
countries (FR, DE, HU, IT, NL, PL, SI, SE, ES, UK), and included a specific chapter on 
ESL.4 

Research evidence from different European countries, other comparative studies, and results 
of  projects  funded  under  European  programmes  (mainly  the  Lifelong  Learning  Programme 
and the EU Framework Programmes for research) have also been taken into account.5  

The  topic  of  ESL  was  also  addressed  in  the  public  consultations  on  'Schools  for  the  21st 
century'6 (2007) and on 'Migration and Education'7 (2008). 

•  The consultation on 'schools for the 21st century' asked how school systems could best 
respond to the need to promote equity, to respond to cultural diversity and to reduce early 
school  leaving.  With  regard  to  ESL,  responding  authorities  in  particular  stressed  the 
importance of a 'remediation' system to reduce school drop-out, capable of intervening at 
an individual and family level as early as possible. Respondents indicated that schools and 
teachers  valued  personalised  learning  highly  to  ensure  intrinsic  motivation  and  reduce 
drop-out.  Both  organisational  and  didactic  reforms  were  mentioned  with  an  emphasis  on 
early  years'  education  and  early  intervention  for  pupils  with  special  needs  –  to  reduce 
inequity and provide the best grounding for learning. 

•  The  consultation  on  migration  and  education  asked  for  views  on  important  policy 
challenges  related  to  the  provision  of  high  quality  education  to  children  from  a  migrant 
background. ESL is regarded as one of the effects of overall educational disadvantage of 
migrant  children.  The  consultation  confirmed  the  view  of  the  Green  Paper  on  Migration 
and  Mobility  that  socio-economic  disadvantage  does  not  account  for  the  full  extent  of 
disadvantage  among  migrant  pupils  nor  for  the  high  rate  of  early  school  leavers  among 
migrant  youth.  Issues  frequently  mentioned  were  school  segregation,  insufficient 
competences  of  teachers  to  work  in  multicultural  classrooms,  and  a  lack  of  equal 
opportunities in education. 

A summary of main outcomes of both consultations with regard to ESL is annexed. 

In  December  2009  a  draft  version  of  a  policy  framework  was  presented  to  a  meeting  of 
Directors General for school education of Member States' education ministries. The policy 
framework underlines the need of evidence-based approaches in fighting ESL. It distinguishes 
between prevention, intervention and compensation and argues for consistent and coordinated 
policies  involving  all  stakeholders.  The  participants  expressed  their  support  for  the  policy 
framework and its basic structure. Many underlined that reducing ESL is one of the priorities 

3 
4 
5 

6 
7 

http://www.nesse.fr/nesse/activities/reports/early-school-leaving.pdf 
http://ec.europa.eu/education/more-information/doc/inclusion/sum_en.pdf 
E.g.  IRIS  (2005)  Policy  measures  concerning  disadvantaged  youth,  launched  by  DG  EMPL, 
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/social_inclusion/docs/youth_study_en.pdf 
SEC(2007)1009. 
COM(2008) 423. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

                                                 
in school education policy. Some countries remarked that there were difficulties in measuring 
ESL and that the problems might even be greater than many stakeholders believe. In addition 
to  measures  at  school  level  such  as  pedagogical  improvements,  better  cooperation  with 
families  was  highlighted  as  crucial.  Interviews  with  early  school  leavers  in  some  countries 
indicated that family instability and lack of family support contributed to drop-out. It was also 
underlined that the consequential costs of ESL exceed by far the costs for measures against 
ESL. In the follow-up of this meeting, Member States contributed to the further development 
of the paper by submitting additional examples of good practice. 

In  May  2010  the  Cluster  'Access  and  Social  Inclusion  in  Education'  met  to  finalise  its 
work.  Cluster  members  were  asked  to  comment  on  a  draft  version  of  a  Staff  Working 
Document  on  ESL  and  the  policy  framework.  The  overall  reaction  was  supportive,  while 
underlining that more attention should  be paid to  the diversity of the issue and the fact that 
European countries face different situations with regard to ESL. Cluster members discussed 
the  various  needs  and  their  corresponding  measures  at  system-level,  school-level  and  with 
regard  to  supporting  individual  pupils.  They  emphasised  the  need  to  'mainstream'  policies 
against  ESL  in  all  policies  related  to  children  and  families.  The  minutes  of  the  meeting  are 
annexed to this IA report. 

When preparing the proposed new initiative on ESL, the Commission decided to build on the 
results of the existing public consultations outlined above, and that a specialised consultation 
of relevant stakeholder organisations would be an appropriate follow-up given the specialised 
nature of the issue. It was therefore decided not to conduct an additional public consultation 
on ESL in preparation of this impact assessment. 

The meeting of European stakeholders in School and Vocational Education took place on 
14  June  2010  in  Brussels.  It  was  attended  by  14  stakeholder  organisations,  representing 
stakeholders  in  general  and  vocational  education  and  training  as  well  as  organisations  for 
children’s rights and well-being, for migrants and for Roma. The selection of participants was 
based  on  those  European  organisations  and  networks  which  participated  in  “round  table” 
meetings  with  the  European  Commission  in  the  area  of  education,  supplemented  by  further 
relevant European-level organisations in the field identified by different units in DG EAC as 
well  as  the  members  of  the  Inter-Service  Impact  Assessment  Steering  Committee.  All 
participants in the stakeholder meeting supported the approach taken in the policy framework. 
Participants  requested  that  aspects  such  as  the  role  of  education  and  schools  for  personal 
development, the individual perspective of the young person, the potentials, competences and 
creativity of children, and their right to education need to be strengthened in the documents. 
Also the limited participation of people with lower educational levels in democratic processes 
was  emphasized,  which  is  a  risk  factor  for  social  cohesion  and  would  be  improved  by  a 
reduction  in  ESL.  It  was  underlined  that  the  economic  and  financial  crisis  increases  the 
urgency  of  the  problem.  Under  conditions  of  austerity,  education  should  be  seen  as  an 
investment, not a cost factor for states and societies. The minutes of the meeting and the list of 
participants are annexed to this IA report. 

A Ministerial Seminar organised under the Belgian Presidency on 9 July 2010 discussed 
current policies on early school leaving. The discussion was introduced by presentations from 
the  Netherlands  and  Hungary.  The  contributions  from  Member  States  underlined  the 
complexity of the problem and its multifaceted causes. They focused on (1) absenteeism as a 
warning  signal,  and  the  importance  to  monitor  and  react  to  it  rapidly  and  decisively;  (2) 
extension  of  compulsory  schooling  to  age  18,  which  had  recently  been  implemented  in  the 
Netherlands,  Hungary  and  Poland;  (3)  improved  guidance  and  family  support,  including 

EN 

7 

   EN 

financial  support  for  pupils  from  disadvantaged  backgrounds;  (4)  reinforcing  vocational 
education and training pathways; and (5) the need to provide compensatory / second chance 
mechanisms to re-engage early leavers from education and training. Participants supported the 
initiative of the Commission to propose a Recommendation and underlined the added value of 
European  exchange  in  this  area.  The  French  delegation  proposed  the  establishment  of  a 
working group on ESL which should facilitate the exchange of good practice, develop a tool 
kit for policy development and provide recommendations on ways to improve the efficiency 
of policy and measures in the area of early school leaving. This initiative was welcomed by 
the other delegations. 

During the process of consultation, all relevant parties have been involved. Discussion papers 
have been made available well in advance. Both written and oral comments have been taken 
into account. 

Chart 1: List of consultations 

Type of consultation 

Education Ministries 

•  DG Schools Meeting in Stockholm in 2008 

•  Cluster  on  Access  and  Social  Inclusion  in  Lifelong  Learning 

(2006 – 2010; 15 countries participating) 

Stakeholders in education and 
training 

Migrant  organisations,  Roma 
organisations 

•  Ministerial Seminar in 2010 

•  Stakeholder meeting in July 2010 

•  Public consultation on schools in 2007 

•  Stakeholder meeting in July 2010 

•  Public consultation on migration and education in 2008 

Broader public 

•  Public consultation on schools in 2007 

•  Public consultation on migration and education in 2008 

Given  the  strong  involvement  of  experts  in  previous  consultations  and  working  groups,  no 
further  external  expertise  was  needed  for  this  impact  assessment.  The  compilation  and 
analysis of the consultation results and expertise has been done by Commission services. 

1.3. 

Political background 

The Education Council set itself in 2003 a benchmark to reduce the EU average rate of early 
school leavers to not more than 10% by 2010. ESL rates are defined as the percentage of 18-
24  year  olds  with  only  lower  secondary  education  or  less  and  no  longer  in  education  or 
training.8  Although  the  situation  in  most  Member  States  has  improved,  this  target  has  not 
been reached. 

8 

Council Conclusions of 5-6 May on reference levels of European average performance in education and 
training  (benchmarks)  (doc.  8981/03).  From  20  November  2009,  this  indicator  is  based  on  annual 
averages of quarterly data instead of one unique reference quarter in spring. Early school leavers refers 
to persons aged 18 to 24 fulfilling the following two conditions: first, the highest level of education or 
training  attained  is  ISCED  0,  1,  2  or  3c  short,  second,  respondents  declared  not  having  received  any 
education or training in the four weeks preceding the survey (numerator). The denominator consists of 
the  total  population  of  the  same  age  group,  excluding  no  answers  to  the  questions  "highest  level  of 
education or training attained" and "participation to education and training". Both the numerators and 
the denominators come from the EU Labour Force Survey 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  establishing  the  next  phase  of  work  under  the  Open  Method  of  Coordination,  the 
‘Education  and  Training  2020’  (ET2020)  programme  in  2009,  the  Council  renewed  the 
target.9  The  need  to  reduce  ESL  was  given  still  greater  political  urgency  under  the  Europe 
2020 strategy, adopted by the European Council in June 2010. It takes as one of five headline 
targets in all fields of EU activity the reduction of ESL to less than 10% by 2020. The new 
strategy  highlights  three  mutually  reinforcing  priorities:  'smart  growth'  based  on  knowledge 
and  innovation,  'sustainable  growth'  promoting  a  greener  economy  and  'inclusive  growth' 
fostering high employment and social cohesion. High rates of ESL are a bottleneck for smart 
and  inclusive  growth.  ESL  effects  negatively  on  youth  employment  and  increases  the 
individual  risk  of  poverty  and  social  exclusion.  To  reduce  ESL  is  therefore  a  gateway  to 
reaching the other targets in Europe 2020.10 In addition to the European target, Member States 
agreed  to  set  national  targets,  taking  into  account  their  starting  position  and  national 
circumstances. They will also draw up National Reform Programmes describing the strategies 
and actions they will undertake to meet their national targets. National targets on the reduction 
of ESL rates will foster policy development in this area and increase the pressure for efficient 
and effective policies against ESL. The new emphasis on ESL will also put more weight on 
the monitoring of policies against ESL, their successes and shortcomings. 

The Europe 2020 flagship initiative 'Youth on the Move'  11 puts ESL in a wider perspective 
by emphasizing the need to improve quality and equity in education and training, to provide 
more young people with the necessary competences to become lifelong learners, and to give 
more  young  people  the  chance  to  experience  learning  mobility.  The  Communication  on 
'Youth  on  the  Move'  announced  that  the  Commission  would  prepare  a  Recommendation  on 
ESL in 2010. 

In April 2010 a resolution of the Council and of the representatives of the governments of the 
Member  States,  meeting  within  the  Council,  on  the  active  inclusion  of  young  people: 
combating unemployment and poverty12 stressed the need to promote education, training and 
non-formal learning in order to enhance employability, to improve young people's knowledge, 
skills  and  competences,  and  to  combat  the  problem  of  early  leaving  from  education  and 
training. 

In  May  2010  the  Council  adopted  conclusions  on  the  'Social  Dimension  of  Education  and 
Training', addressing also the problem of early school leaving and inviting Member States to 
intensify efforts to prevent ESL in particular by implementing " (…) Comprehensive, cross-
sectoral  strategies  should  be  implemented,  which  provide  a  range  of  school-wide  and 
systemic policies targeting the different factors leading to early school-leaving."13 

2. 

SECTION 2: PROBLEM DEFINITION 

In 2009 14.4% of all 18 – 24 year olds left education and training prematurely.14 In 2000 the 
average rate of ESL in the EU stood at 17.6%, 3.2 percentage points above its current level. 

9 
10 

11 

12 
13 
14 

OJ, C119, 28.5.2009. 
Commission  Communication  "Europe  2020  -  A  strategy  for  smart,  sustainable  and  inclusive  growth" 
COM(2010)2020; Conclusions of the European Council 17 June 2010 
Commission  Communication  "Youth  on  the  Move.  An  initiative  to  unleash  the  potential  of  young 
people to achieve smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in the European Union" COM(2010) 477 
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/10/st09/st09018.en10.pdf 
OJ C 135, 26.5.2010 
Eurostat, Labour Force Survey (LFS) 2010; more information on 
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/europe_2020_indicators/headline_indicators  

EN 

9 

   EN 

                                                 
Since 2000 the situation has improved in nearly all Member States, although the success rates 
show  considerable  differences.  The  progress  achieved  has  been  insufficient.  With  eight 
countries having reached the benchmark and some close to the target, a further reduction of 
ESL rates is realistic. But to achieve this especially in times of economic and financial crisis 
needs stronger and better coordinated efforts. 

Chart  2:  Percentage  of  the  population  aged  18-24  with  at  most  lower  secondary 
education and not further in education or training (2009)15 

2009 rates 

Evolution 2000-2009  
(% relative change) 

Benchmark 2010 + 2020 

4.9

5.3

5.3

5.4

7.7

8.7

8.7

9.9

10.6

10.7

10.9

11.1

11.1

11.2

11.3

11.7

12.3

13.9

13.9

14.4

14.5

14.7

15.7

16.6

19.2

-54.2

-47.3

Slovakia
Slovenia
Poland
Czech Republic
Luxembourg
Austria
Lithuania
Finland
Denmark
Sweden
Netherlands
Belgium
Germany
Hungary
Ireland
Cyprus
France
Estonia
Latvia
UE-27
Greece
Bulgaria
United Kingdom
Romania
Italia
Spain
Portugal
Malta

-26.9

-28.4

-17.2

-5.3

-14.7

-9.4

-29.2

-19.6

-24.0

-19.4

-22.6

-36.8

-7.5

-7.9

-17.8

-18.2

-20.3

-28.3

-27.5

-23.5

-13.7

-28.4

-32.1

10.0

46.6

7.2

31.2

31.2

36.8

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

The EU average ESL rate masks large differences in the performance of Member States and 
also within regions: for instance in Germany in 2006 the rate of young people leaving schools 
without lower secondary qualifications varied from 3% to 26% on NUTS3 level.16 

Several factors influence ESL rates and affect regions or municipalities in different ways: 

•  Socio-economic  conditions:  ESL  is  more  frequent  in  areas  with  concentrated  socio-
economic disadvantage. Pupils often lack sufficient support from their families and peers, 
and  have  also  only  limited  access  to  high  quality  education  or  additional  educational 
support  within  the  community.  In  some  underdeveloped  rural  areas  the  possibilities  to 
attend  upper  secondary  education  are  limited  by  long  distances  between  home  and 
education or training institution or a generally insufficient offer. 

15 

16 

Eurostat.  LFS.  Data  for  Slovenia  and  Croatia  lack  reliability  due  to  a  small  sample  size.  Cyprus: 
Students studying abroad are not covered by the survey; this indicator could therefore be overestimated. 
Bulgaria,  Poland  and  Slovenia:  evolution  refers  to  the  period  2001-2009.  Czech  Republic,  Ireland, 
Latvia, Slovakia and Croatia: evolution refers to the period 2002-2009. 
Stefan  Kühne:  Datenfriedhof  oder  Goldgrube?  Zum  Potenzial  schulstatistischer  Individualdaten  für 
Abschlussindikatoren,  in:  Indikatorenentwicklung  für  den  nationalen  Bildungsbericht,  Bd  33  (2010), 
p.85 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
•  Situation on the labour market: Pull-effects from the labour market play an important role 
in  areas  which,  due  to  their  economic  structure,  offer  many  unqualified  jobs.  Prominent 
examples are regions with tourism industries: young people often give up further education 
and training in order to join the family business or to work in local hotels and restaurants. 
In  some  countries  employment  rates  of  early  leavers  from  education  and  training  are  far 
above average and indicate well this pull-effect. 

•  Migration: Children with migrant background are more affected by ESL than their native 
peers. In regions with large migrant populations and especially those with a recent increase 
of immigration, the number of early leavers tends to be above average.  

•  Structure  of  education  and  training  systems  /  educational  offer:  The  organisation  of 
education and training, the structure of the system or the quality of its offer influences the 
incidence  of  ESL.  High  ESL  rates  in  VET  can  for  example  indicate  an  inappropriate 
organisation of VET, low quality or a lack of career perspectives after finishing VET. 

•  Different  approaches  in  addressing  ESL:  Only  few  Member  States  have  introduced 
comprehensive  policies  to  combat  ESL.  Gathering  data  and  information  on  ESL  and 
analysing  the  main  factors  leading  to  school  drop-out  helped  them  to  launch  targeted 
measures  and  mobilise  the  right  support  for  pupils  at  risk  of  dropping-out.  The  results 
appear to be sustainable and to have led to long-term change. This is often not the case if 
measures are implemented on a time-limited basis (e.g. pilot projects), are not coordinated 
with other policies, or are focussed only on one aspect of ESL (e.g. guidance or academic 
support). 

There  is  no  single  reason  for  ESL.  ESL  is  a  complex  phenomenon  and  the  reasons  for  its 
occurrence  need  detailed  analysis.  Even  in  countries  with  below-average  rates  of  ESL 
individual  groups  such  as  Roma  can  be  highly  affected.  Targeted  measures  are  needed  to 
address this problem and support the educational attainment of such groups. Also changes in 
ESL rates can be the result of non-educational factors such as the current economic crisis. 

Based  on  the  experience  in  Member  States,  some  key  factors  for  a  successful  reduction  of 
ESL  have  been  identified:  (1)  a  sound  evidence  base  on  the  complex  problem  of  ESL  in  a 
country,  region  or  municipality  which  allows  for  precise  targeting  of  policy  measures,  (2) 
flexibility  and  creativity  in  developing  target  measures  and  (3)  increased  incentives  and 
accountability for regions or schools to lower their ESL rates. 

ESL  creates  high  individual,  social  and  economic  costs.  The  consequences  of  ESL  affect 
people throughout their lives, and reduce their chance to participate in the social, cultural and 
economic life of society. ESL increases their individual risk of poverty and social exclusion. 
The high rate of ESL in European societies has long-term effects on labour markets, on the 
availability  of  skilled  employees  and  thus  on  economic  growth.  Such  effects  are  likely  to 
increase in many EU Member States due to the economic and financial crisis. In more detail: 

•  Skill  mismatches  and  high  ESL  rates  can  have  severe  consequences  for  the  recovering 
economy and hamper economic development. Over 70% of early school leavers in the EU 
complete  only  lower  secondary  education.  A  very  worrying  fact  is  that  17.4%  of  early 
leavers in the EU have completed only primary education.17 Forecasts state that by 2020 

17 

Eurostat, LFS 2010. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

                                                 
85%  of  all  jobs  will  require  high  or  medium  qualifications.  35%  of  all  jobs  will  require 
high qualification levels in 2020, compared to 29% today. The share of jobs available for 
low skilled people will decrease from 20% to less than 15%.18 

•  The crisis, together with the rapid pace of social, technological and demographic change, 
underlines  the  urgency  to  improve  skill  levels  and  the  future  employability  of  young 
people. Youth unemployment increased sharply in 2010 to 20.3% and exceeds by far the 
total unemployment rate.19 52% of early school leavers in 2009 were unemployed. 

•  ESL  creates  and  perpetuates  social  and  economic  disadvantage.  On  average  early  school 
leavers have lower wages and are more often dependent on social assistance. Their living 
situation has negative impacts on their heath, physical and psychological well-being. Due 
to  low  wages  and  unemployment  they  are  likely  to  receive  also  low  pensions  after 
retirement and to remain dependent on social assistance.20 

•  Early  leavers  participate  less  in  lifelong  learning  and  thus  re-training.  Their  educational 
disadvantage can create a growing handicap for them. In addition budget cuts in times of 
economic crisis risk limiting opportunities for re-entering education and training. Already 
now  some  of  the  projects  supporting  the  reintegration  of  early  school  leavers  are  being 
withdrawn or reduced in size. 

•  Early  leavers  also  tend  to  participate  less  in  democratic  processes  and  are  less  active 
citizens.  They  often  feel  unable  to  influence  on  political  decisions  and  politically 
excluded.21 

•  For societies, high rates of ESL create massive costs due to increased expenditure on social 
assistance  and  health  and  lower  economic  growth  and  lower  tax  revenues.  Children  of 
early  school  leavers  are  more  likely  to  become  early  school  leavers  themselves,  to  have 
poorer health and to have lower levels of education.22 

•  Some  groups  in  society  are  especially  affected  by  ESL.  The  EU  average  rate  of  ESL  is 
double  for  migrant  youth  than  for  native  youth  (26.4%  vs.  13.1%  in  2009)  and  is  even 
higher for Roma populations.23 

The  following  table  presents  the  different  cost  categories  affected  by  ESL.  It  distinguishes 
between private or individual costs, costs for the society and fiscal costs. This compilation of 
costs  makes  it  clear  that  high  ESL  rates  turn  an  individual  disadvantage  into  social  and 
economic disadvantage for a country as a whole. 

18 
19 

20 
21 
22 

23 

CEDEFOP, 2010: Skills supply and demand in Europe: medium-term forecast up to 2020, p.13 
Eurostat,  Unemployment  statistics,  unemployment  rate  of  young  people  under  25  for  the  3rd  quarter 
2010. 
See Joint report on Social Protection and Social Inclusion 2009, p.120 
NESSE (2009), p.31. See also Shell Jugendstudie 2010 (2010).  
Early  School  Leaving.  Lessons  from  research  for  policy  makers  (2009),  report  submitted  by  the 
Network of Experts in Social Sciences of Education (NESSE), p.31 
Eurostat, LFS 2010 

EN 

12 

   EN 

                                                 
Chart 4: Categorizing the cost elements of school failure24 

Cost category  Cost element 

Private 

Social 

Fiscal 

Higher unemployment incidence 
Higher unemployment duration 
Lower initial and lifetime earnings 
Lower own health status 
Higher own discount rate 
Less risk aversion 
Less lifelong learning participation 
Lower health status of children 
Lower education levels of children 
Lower lifetime satisfaction 
Increased criminality 
Lower positive spill over effects on co-workers 
Lower rate of economic growth 
Lower intergenerational effects on children and parents 
Lower public health status 
Higher unemployment 
Lower social cohesion 
Lower tax revenues 
Higher unemployment and welfare payments 
Higher public health expenditures 
Higher police expenditure 
Higher criminal justice expenditure 

Several  studies  and  econometric  simulations  have  sought  to  quantify  the  economic  costs  of 
ESL, school failure and/or low cognitive skills. Although there are strong indications that skill 
variations  are  related  to  economic  growth  it  is  difficult  to  evaluate  the  monetary  amounts 
precisely.25  Whereas  average  direct  costs  of  ESL  such  as  social  benefit  payments  and 
additional training measures can be estimated relatively robustly, the indirect costs are more 
difficult  to  define  but  tend  to  be  significantly  higher.  One  example  for  the  calculation  of 
indirect  costs  is  the  recent  OECD  publication  on  "The  High  Costs  of  Low  Educational 
Performance",  which  estimates  that  a  25  point  average  increase  of  PISA  (Programme  for 
International  Student  Assessment)  scores  would  lead  to  massive  economic  gain.26  A  study 
focussing  on  Germany  only,  but  taking  a  similar  approach,  comes  to  comparable 
conclusions.27 There are only few reliable studies which calculate the indirect costs of early 
school leaving. They often have a limited geographical scope and do not provide figures for 
the whole EU. Their estimates give a rough indication of costs; projected on the lifetime of an 

24 

25 

26 

27 

EENEE (2007) The costs of school failure. A feasibility study, p.7. Note: “Higher” or “lower” in this 
table is defined relative to a control group situation of non-school failure, however the latter is defined. 
Eric A Hanushek, Ludger Woessmann (2010) The economics of international differences in educational 
achievement, p.53. 
OECD (2010) The high cost of low educational performance. It is assumed that an increase of average 
Pisa scores by 25 points by 2030 would imply an aggregated gain of OECD GDP of USD 115 trillion 
over the lifetime of the generation born in 2010. 
Ludger Woessmann, Marc Piopiunik: Was unzureichende Bildung kostet, Muenchen 2009. The study 
concludes that insufficient education creates a loss of 2.8 trillion EUR GDP by 2090. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
early leaver these costs sum up to several hundred thousand, or even over a million, EUR per 
early leaver.28 

•  The National Audit Office of Finland has calculated the costs of ESL based on 2006/2007 
data. They conclude that the costs per year per person are 27,500 EUR. Over the course of 
his/her  adulthood  (40years)  this  amounts  to  1.1  million  EUR.29  A  Dutch  study  estimates 
that the costs of ESL amount to 1.8 million EUR per person over the course of his/her the 
lifetime.30 

•  A German study calculated in 2006 that the direct costs of inadequate learning, including 
ESL,  alone  amounted  to  7.1  billion  Euro  annually.  The  study  estimated  that  each  year 
220,000  students  leave  school  without  adequate  skills,  80,000  to  90,000  without  any 
qualification.  The  estimate  of  direct  costs  was  composed  of  inefficient  spending  in  the 
school  system  (3.7  billion  EUR)  and  additional  funding  spend  on  post-school  'repair' 
measures  of  school  deficits  (3.4  billion  EUR).  It  did  not  include  costs  incurred  due  to 
unemployment and dependency on social benefits.31 

•  A  UK  estimation  states  that  reducing  the  number  of  individuals  with  no  education 
qualification  by  one  percentage  point  would  lead  to  a  net  crime  reduction  of  between 
88,000  and  44,000  offences.  The  corresponding  figure  in  terms  of  social  benefits  from 
prevented crimes ranges from £109 to £54 million.32 

These estimations have to be treated with caution and provide only fragmented information, 
but they show that ESL creates long-term costs for societies and high rates of ESL have major 
economic impacts. 

2.1. 

Underlying drivers 

ESL  is  a  complex  phenomenon  and  the  processes  that  lead  to  ESL  are  driven  by  different 
factors. The reasons why young people leave education and training  prematurely are  highly 
individual.  Nevertheless  it  is  possible  to  indicate  some  recurrent  characteristics  of  ESL 
processes. 

•  Social  drivers  of  ESL:  As  a  social  phenomenon  ESL  is  strongly  linked  to  social 
disadvantage  and  low  education  backgrounds.  Children  from  parents  with  low  levels  of 
education,  from  socially  disadvantaged  backgrounds  and  pupils  with  migration  or  Roma 
background  are  more  likely  to  leave  education  and  training  before  completing  upper 
secondary education levels than other young people. They tend to lack sufficient support 
from  their  families,  face  discrimination  within  the  education  system  (such  as  low 
expectations  from  teachers  and  peers,  increased  likelihood  of  being  assigned  to  lower-
status  school  tracks,  etc)  and  have  limited  access  to  non-formal  and  in-formal  learning 
opportunities outside compulsory schooling. 

28 

29 

30 
31 
32 

EN 

See for example Canadian Council of Learning, No "drop" in the bucket, the high costs of dropping out, 
p.4.  See  also  Dropout  Strategie.  Grundlagen  zur  Prävention  und  Reintegration  von  Dropouts  in 
Ausbildung und Beschäftigung. Projektbericht des IHS Wien November 2007 
Nuoret  miehet 
elinkeinoministerion julkaisuja. Työ ja yrittäjyys 34/2009 
CEDEFOP (2010) Guiding at-risk youth through learning to work, p.29 
Helmut E. Klein: Direkte Kosten mangelder Ausbildungsreife in Deutschland, IW-trends, 4/2005. 
Stephen Machin et.al. The Crime Reducing Effect of Education, June 2010 

tarvitaan  TE-toimistoissa.  Työja 

työelämään.  Mitä  paveluja 

toimenpiteitä 

ja 

14 

   EN 

                                                 
•  Educational drivers of ESL: ESL is rather a process than a one-off event. ESL processes 
often  start  already  in  primary  education  with  first  experiences  of  school  failure  and 
growing  alienation  from  school.  Transition  between  schools  and  between  different 
education  levels  are  particularly  difficult  for  pupils  at  risk  of  dropping  out.  Mismatches 
between education and training curricula and labour market needs can increase the risk of 
educational  failure  as  pupils  lack  prospects  within  their  educational  pathway.  Education 
and  training  systems  often  do  not  provide  sufficient  targeted  support  for  pupils  to  cope 
with emotional, social or educational difficulties and to remain in education and training. 

•  Combination of educational and other factors: ESL processes are influenced by educational 
factors (e.g. the structure, access and quality of educational provision), by individual and 
by  socio-economic  conditions  (e.g.  living  conditions  and  family  background,  pull  factors 
from  local  labour  markets).  All  such  conditions  must  be  taken  into  account  when 
supporting pupils at risk of dropping out. 

•  Policy shortcomings: As described above, the success rates of Member States in reducing 
ESL are different due to the specific situation(s) within the country, but also due to the way 
policies against ESL are conceptualized. Only few Member States follow a consistent and 
comprehensive  strategy  to  reduce  ESL.  Many  initiatives  against  ESL  are  not  sufficiently 
linked  to  other  policies  addressing  young  people.  There  is  also  often  a  lack  of  sound 
analysis of the specific problems within a region or target group. With regard to ESF co-
financed  measures  in  six  Member  States,  the  above  cited  Special  Report  of  the  Court  of 
Auditors  from  2006  concluded  that  "ESF  co-financed  activities  for  ESL  were  initiated 
without adequate analysis of the existing situation and the expected or targeted result." The 
report also states that "activities did not form part of a strategic plan (…)."33 

33 

OJ 2006/C99/3 and 7. 

EN 

15 

   EN 

                                                 
Chart 5: Structure of the problem in its economic, social and educational dimension 

Economic Dimension 

Social Dimension 

Educational Dimension 

Skill mismatches and lack of 
qualified employees 
Bottlenecks to economic growth 
due to lack of skilled labour 
Persistent rates of structural 
unemployment 
High rates of youth 
unemployment 
Low income and household 
consumption of low skilled 
employees and unemployed 
people 
Low tax revenues 

Low efficiency of programmes 
aimed at reducing early school 
leaving, due to fragmentation 
and/or inadequate coverage 
Risk that existing measures 
against ESL are affected by 
budget cuts and are discontinued 
before proper evaluation of 
impact 
Difficult to introduce new 
programmes or forms of support 
to reduce ESL, given current 
fiscal position in most MS 

Continuous slow reduction of 
ESL in most MS 
Risk that measures against ESL 
are affected by budget cuts 
Persistence of economic costs/ 
losses due to ESL 
High unemployment rates 
especially among early school 
leavers  

n
o
i
s
s
e
r
p
x
e
m
e
l
b
o
r
P

i

s
g
n
m
o
c
t
r
o
h
s

y
c
i
l
o
P

e
g
n
a
h
c

y
c
i
l
o
p
o
N

  Early school leavers, young 
d
e
t
c
e
f
f
a
s
i

people with insufficient skills 
Companies/ economy 
Tax authorities 

o
h
W

2.2. 

EU right to act 

Social disadvantage as one of 
the roots of ESL 
Reproduction of social 
disadvantage due to ESL 
High social costs in case of 
long-term unemployment 
Lack of social cohesion 
High risk of poverty and social 
exclusion for persons/ families 
affected 
Poverty related problems such 
as health problems, alcohol and 
drugs abuse, crime 
Reduced participation in 
democratic processes and in 
civil society 
Insufficient focus on groups at 
risk (migrants, Roma, etc) 
Lack of adequate programmes 
tackling multiple factors for 
ESL 
Need for stronger articulation 
between education and social 
support programmes 
Inadequate targeting of existing 
support programmes, given 
insufficient knowledge base on 
who are the early school leavers 
Limited scope for partnerships 
and involvement of the groups 
at risk in programme/policy 
definition 
Slow reduction of social costs 
due to ESL 
Risk to jeopardise fragmented 
initiatives against ESL due to 
austerity measures 
Persistence and perpetuation of 
educational achievement gap 
between minorities and natives  

Early school leavers and their 
families 
Social support and health 
services 
Civic society, NGOs and 
initiatives 

Lack of equity in education 
Insufficient basic skills of early 
school leavers 
Experience of failure in learning 
and growing alienation from 
formal education and learning 
Lower participation in lifelong 
leaning 
Lack of comprehensive and 
cross sectoral policies/ measures 
on all educational levels to 
reduce ESL 
Lack of data on ESL and 
evidence-based policy 
approaches 

Fragmentation of initiatives 
tackling ESL 
Inadequate definition of target 
groups/ incomplete coverage 
Lack of alignment of incentives 
provided by different 
programmes 
Current efforts to reduce ESL 
seem to level out, a new set of 
initiatives is needed. 

No strong support for 
comprehensive policies against 
ESL 
Risk that measures against ESL 
have limited scope and fail to 
cover all target groups 
concerned 
Persistence and perpetuation of 
educational achievement gap  
Education authorities 
Schools, teachers 
Education and training 
providers 
Pupils 
Companies 
Civil society 

Education and training policy is an area where, as a result of the subsidiarity principle, the EU 
has  supporting  competence  as  defined  by  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European 
Union (Lisbon Treaty). The Treaty (Article 165) provides that "the Union shall contribute to 
the  development  of  quality  education  by  encouraging  cooperation  between  Member  States 
and,  if  necessary,  by  supporting  and  supplementing  their  action".  In  addition  Article  9 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
requires  EU  to  "take  into  account  requirements  linked  to  the  promotion  of  a  high  level  of 
employment,  the  guarantee  of  adequate  social  protection,  the  fight  against  social  exclusion, 
and a high level of education, training and protection of human health." 

An  initiative  on  ESL  addresses  the  quality  improvement  of  education  and  training  and  its 
outcomes, helps to reduce skill mismatches, and supports employability and social cohesion. 
It  focuses  on  facilitating  and  encouraging  cooperation  between  Member  States  and  aims  to 
support  their  initiatives.  Given  the  complexity  of  the  problem,  the  exchange  of  experiences 
and good practice can play a decisive role in reaching the 10% benchmark by 2020. It allows 
Member  States  not  only  to  profit  from  experiences  made  in  other  countries.  A  comparative 
analysis  of  main  factors  leading  to  ESL  or  influencing  its  incidence  can  contribute  to  the 
knowledge  base  on  ESL  and  draw  attention  especially  to  the  relevant  systemic  factors.  The 
above mentioned Ministerial Seminar on 9 July 2010 showed that Member States appreciate 
the  work  within  the  Open  Method  of  Coordination  and  would  welcome  an  extension  of 
activities in the area of early school leaving. 

The  initiative  respects  the  subsidiarity  principle  by  providing  support  and  facilitating 
exchange among  Member States,  but respecting the  responsibility  of  the  Member  States  for 
the content of teaching and the organisation of their education systems. 

2.3. 

Baseline scenario  

Currently  the  reduction  of  ESL  forms  part  of  priority  3  in  the  new  strategic  framework  for 
cooperation  in  education  and  training  under  the  open  method  of  coordination  (“ET2020”) 
addressing  the  promotion  of  equity,  social  cohesion  and  active  citizenship  in  education. 
ET2020  builds  on  the  results  of  existing  OMC  work  under  the  predecessor  programme  ET 
2010. 

Although  the  results  produced  in  ET2010  were  of  good  quality,  one  major  weakness 
concerned  the  difficulties  to  exploit  results  effectively.  Member  States  participated  on  a 
voluntary basis in ET 2010 and several with high rates of ESL chose not to do so, or were not 
able. So not all Member States were able to take full advantage of the lessons learnt within 
peer  learning.  New  and  successful  approaches  highlighted  in  the  OMC  could  not  easily  be 
integrated  in  existing  national  policies;  there  was  no  common  agenda  which  could  have 
helped targeting the work of the cluster and supporting the learning process within Member 
States. 

The  new  strategy  Europe  2020  emphasises  the  need  to  take  more  measures  against  ESL. 
Member States have undertaken to set national targets. National Reform Programmes form an 
important  tool  to  strengthen  the  work  in  this  area;  the  setting  and  monitoring  of  national 
targets  are  likely  to  impact  positively  on  the  commitment  of  Member  States  and  so  should 
lead to a reduction of ESL rates. However, the 10% target for the reduction of ESL is purely 
output oriented, and does not include any help how to reach this target effectively. Though it 
would  certainly  go  beyond  the  remit  of  the  EU  to  define  more  process-oriented  targets,  the 
EU  is  in  a  unique  position  to  offer  additional  support  to  policy  development  in  Member 
States. This is complementary to the Europe 2020 reporting and monitoring process. 

Existing funding opportunities, mainly European Social Funds (ESF), the Lifelong Learning 
Programme (LLP) or the Framework Programmes for Research (RTD) programme, allow for 
the  launch  of  targeted  action,  comparative  studies,  research  and  development  of  new 
approaches.  The  LLP  plays  an  important  role  in  developing  innovative  approaches  against 

EN 

17 

   EN 

ESL. It enhances cooperation between Member States on all levels, from an individual school 
to  educational  authorities.  It  also  involves  non-education  actors  and  might  contribute  to  the 
development  of  holistic  solutions  also  in  this  very  aspect.  ESF  funds  have  the  potential  to 
support the implementation of new policies against ESL on a much wider scale and can have 
a  much  more  substantial  impact  in  Member  States.  Nevertheless  project  based  funding  is 
unlikely to change the current situation however good the individual projects are. Investments 
need to be based on a strong evidence base and need to be integrated in a comprehensive and 
consistent  policy  against  ESL.  The  opinion  of  the  Court  of  Auditors  is  that  such  a 
comprehensive  and  consistent  approach  to  supporting  ESL  policies  under  the  ESF  needs 
significant reinforcement. 

The  economic  crisis  increases  the  urgency  of  taking  more  effective  measures  against  ESL. 
Lack of jobs for the low-skilled might reduce pull-effects from the labour market, but at the 
same  time  it  increases  the  negative  effects  of  ESL.  Funding  cuts  may  reduce  the  range  of 
options and support available to those at risk of dropping out or having already dropped out of 
school. Young people with low levels of education, and early school leavers risk being finally 
neither in employment nor in education or training.34 The crisis will also further diminish the 
need for low skilled labour in Europe. The costs of ESL for the individual, for societies and 
for the economy will increase. A slow reduction of ESL rates is therefore insufficient to cope 
with the effects of the economic crisis. 

Based on this status quo and without strengthened or more targeted efforts, it can be assumed 
that the progress in reducing ESL will remain sub-optimal. Reasons for this assumption are a) 
the  slow  progress  in  the  past,  b)  the  lack  of  evidence-based,  comprehensive  and  consistent 
policies  in  many  Member  States  and  c)  the  potential  effects  of  the  economic  crisis  and  of 
austerity measures taken in many Member States. 

2.4. 

Policy requirements 

Research  evidence  and  existing  experiences  from  countries  which  reduced  ESL  rates 
successfully  suggest  that  efficient  and  effective  policies  against  ESL  need  to  be  evidence-
based, comprehensive and consistent. 

Data and information gaps concern for example: 

•  The  socio-economic,  cultural  or  ethnical  background  of  early  leavers:  Existing  data  does 
often not allow for detailed analyses which groups are concerned, why and how additional 
support could help them to maintain education and training. 

•  The  number  of  early  leavers  from  vocational  education  and  training:  Several  countries 
report  that  ESL  rates  in  VET  are  especially  high.  Due  to  a  lack  of  systematic  analytical 
information, it is not clear if this is due to the specific social composition of VET students 
or low quality of VET provision. 

•  Only  few  countries  survey  the  reasons  why  young  people  discontinue  education  and 
training.  Existing  studies  show  that  their  reasons  provide  clear  indicators  of  existing 
problems  in  education  and  training  and  should  be  taken  into  account  when  designing 
policies against ESL. 

34 

Youth unemployment rose by 3.7 percentage points between the first quarter 2008 and the first quarter 
2009. Eurostat, STAT/09/109, 23 July 2009; Unemployment statistics, data from 30 April 2010. 

EN 

18 

   EN 

                                                 
Although  individual  pupil  data  and  information  on  absenteeism  and  educational  attainment 
exist  at  school  level,  the  reporting  and  aggregation  of  data  follows  different  procedures  in 
Member States. The UK introduced in 1997 the 'unique pupil number' (UPN) which provides 
a rich source for analysis and helps target school policy more effectively also in fields other 
than  ESL.  Other  countries  introduced  'individual  education  numbers',  data  collections  based 
on  individual  pupil  data,  or  national  student  registers  (e.g.  the  Netherlands,  Germany,  and 
Italy). For the Netherlands the introduction of the 'individual education number' and the on-
line monitoring of ESL are regarded as main success factors in the reduction of ESL. 

Detailed  data  on  individual  educational  attainment  and  their  aggregation  and  analysis  offer 
better  insight  into  the  characteristics  of  pupils  at  risks  of  dropping-out,  the  barriers  some 
pupils face in their education careers and potential difficulties within a region, municipality or 
school. Depending on the structure and quality of data, studies and surveys might need to fill 
existing  gaps.35  Experiences  in  some  Member  States  also  show  that  more  accurate 
quantifications  give  a  more  realistic  view  on  the  issue,  and  can  indeed  lead  to  an  apparent 
increase in the ESL figures.36  

Effective policies against ESL need to address all levels of education, to be cross-sectoral and 
to involve stakeholders from the areas such as youth policy, social and employment policies 
and the health sector. The involvement of all levels within the education and training system 
or increased accountability of regions or municipalities in reducing ESL have been mentioned 
by stakeholders and representatives from Ministries as an important success factor. The best 
way  to  address  this  is  highly  dependent  on  the  organization  of  the  education  and  training 
system. 

Policies against ESL should focus on prevention, intervention and compensation. 

•  Prevention  seeks  to  avoid  the  conditions  from  arising  where  processes  leading  to  early 
school leaving can start: Increasing participation in good quality early childhood education 
as care has been identified as one of the most effective measures to give children a good 
start  in  education  and  to  build  their  resilience.  Other  preventative  measures  address 
questions  such  as  systematic  language  support  for  children  with  migrant  background,  an 
active  desegregation  policy  which  improves  the  social,  ethnical  and  cultural  'mixity'  in 
schools,  allows  for  better  peer  learning  and  helps  integration,  or  the  targeted  support  of 
disadvantaged  schools.  Additional  potential  obstacles  to  successful  school  careers  can  be 
removed  by  increasing  the  permeability  of  educational  pathways  and  strengthening 
vocational education pathways. 

•  Intervention  addresses  emerging  difficulties  at  an  early  stage  and  seeks  to  prevent  them 
from leading to school drop-out. Intervention measures can focus on the whole school or 
training institution or can address individual pupils who are at risk of discontinuing their 
education or training. Whole school measures aim at improving the school climate and the 
creation of supportive learning environments. The provision of efficient help for pupils at 
risk  such  as  early  warning  systems  and  better cooperation with parents. Also networking 
with  actors  outside  the  school  and  access  to  local  support  networks  tends  to  be  highly 
efficient in providing relevant support. Student-focused measures focus on mentoring and 

35 
36 

Kühne (2010), p. 79 ff. 
In  the  Netherlands  ESL  figures  were  revised  in  2004  and  increased  from  16000  to  70000  pupils 
affected. Court of Auditors, Special Report No 1/2006, OJ 2006/C99/9. 

EN 

19 

   EN 

                                                 
tutoring, personalized learning approaches, improved guidance and financial support such 
as education allowances. 

•  Compensation  measures  offer  opportunities  for  education  and  training  for  those  who 
dropped  out.  They  aim  to  support  young  people  to  re-enter  mainstream  education  or 
provide a so-called “second chance”. Successful approaches in second chance institutions 
differ therefore considerably from mainstream schools by addressing the difficulties pupils 
had in mainstream schooling. Nevertheless there is evidence that prevention of ESL shows 
better results than compensating the negative effects of ESL. The experience of failure, a 
lack  of  self-confidence  in  learning  and  increased  social,  emotional  and  educational 
problems  after  dropping-out  increase  the  constraints  to  achieve  a  qualification  and  finish 
education successfully.37 

In most Member States numerous projects and initiatives exist in parallel, but often with no 
links  with  the  initiatives  of  other  communities  or  organisations.38  Despite  their  reported 
success,  their  impacts  too  often  remain  at  the  local  or  regional  level.  Given  the  urgency  of 
reducing  ESL,  the  main  requirement  is  to  shift  from  implementing  individual  measures  to 
introducing  a  comprehensive  policy  against  ESL.  The  elements  of  such  policies  have  to  be 
adapted to the concrete situation within the Member States. 

Chart  6:  Summary  of  the  main  elements  of  evidence-based,  comprehensive  and 
consistent policies against ESL 

3. 

SECTION 3: OBJECTIVES 

The general objective is, based on the Lisbon Treaty, to support Member States in their efforts 
to  improve  education  and  training.  The  specific  objective  of  the  initiative  is  very  closely 
linked to this overall aim: to reduce ESL in Europe means to improve the educational offer to 

37 
38 

NESSE (2009), p. 45. 
See Frank Braun: Einleitung, in 'Schulabbrüche und Ausbildungslosigkeit", München 2007  

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
                                                 
many young people. It would help to provide more young people with qualifications, increase 
their employability and reduce their risk of social exclusion. 

The  operational  objectives  are  to  help  Member  States  in  developing  effective  and  efficient 
policies  against  ESL.  The  initiative  shall  support  them  in  introducing  an  evidence-based 
approach  to  address  ESL,  defining  the  main  elements  of  a  national  policy  framework,  and 
taking comprehensive and consistent measures against ESL in all policies targeting children 
and  young  people.  It  shall  help  Member  States  to  address  the  existing  policy  shortcomings 
and reinforce their commitment. It can support them in developing the relevant parts of their 
National Reform Programmes within the Europe 2020 strategy. 

This  will  be  supported  by  a  broadened  cooperation  and  exchange  of  experiences  and  good 
practice among Member States. The huge variety of projects, practices and experiences within 
Member  States  calls  for  a  better  system  of  exchange  and  peer  learning  between  them. 
Cooperation should include also representatives and stakeholders from other relevant policies 
areas such as social and employment policies and youth policy. In this way it addresses the 
social drivers of ESL processes as well as the educational drivers. A holistic approach toward 
ESL  should  foster  cross-sectoral  cooperation  on  all  levels,  take  the  combination  of  factors 
leading  to  ESL  in  consideration  and  reinforce  the  commitment  of  all  actors  to  pro-actively 
reduce ESL. 

A  more  targeted  use  of  EU  funding  such  as  the  ESF  and  the  LLP  should  support  the 
development  of  evidence-based  policy  within  Member  States.  The  LLP  in  particular  can 
support  innovation  and  experimentation  in  new  approaches  to  addressing  ESL  and  the 
conditions  for their transfer  between Member States. The ESF has the potential to lead to a 
significant expansion of effective policy measures, by acting as a driver for large-scale change 
within Member States.  

Chart 7: Objectives of the initiative against ESL 

General 
objectives 

Specific 
objectives 

Operational 
objectives 

•  To  contribute  to  the  development  of  quality  education  by  encouraging 
cooperation between Member States and by supporting and supplementing 
their action 

•  Reduction of the average ESL rate in the EU to less than 10% 

•  Increase of skill levels and employability of young people 

•  Decrease of the risk of poverty and social exclusion 

•  Increased effectiveness of policies against early school leaving 

• Member  States  improve  data  and  information  gathering,  laying  a 

foundation for evidence-based policy development 

• Member States revise and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of 
their initiatives and develop a consistent strategy against ESL (such 
as national policy frameworks against ESL) 

•  Member  States  extend  their  cooperation  and  exchange  of  good  practice, 
supported  by  thematic  working  groups,  peer-learning  activities,  seminars 

EN 

21 

   EN 

and conferences 

•  Majority  of  Member  States  increased  cross-sectoral  cooperation,  through 

extended membership of thematic expert group  

•  Reinforced commitment of Member States to launch policies against early 

school leaving 

•  Better  targeted  use  of  ESF  and  LLP  funding,  supported  by  launching 
comparative  studies  at  EU  level  and  by  supporting  data  and  information 
gathering, analysis and policy development. 

3.1. 

Consistency of objectives with other EU policies 

The  objectives  of  the  initiative  are  in  line  with  the  Europe  2020  strategy.39  Reducing  ESL 
contributes to the EU targets on reducing poverty and youth unemployment. Member States 
agreed  on  reducing  poverty  by  aiming  to  lift  at  least  20  million  people  out  of  the  risk  of 
poverty. They also aim to bring to 75% the employment rate for women and men aged 20 to 
64, including also through the greater participation of youth. 40In order to reach this target, it 
is  important  to  help  especially  young  people  to  gain  sufficient  qualification  and  to  increase 
their  employability.  Reducing  ESL  contributes  to  increasing  skill  levels  in  Europe  and  thus 
supports social and political inclusion.  

The Europe 2020 flagship initiative 'An agenda for new skills and jobs'41 stresses the need to 
empower  people  by  developing  their  skills  throughout  life  and  to  increase  labour  market 
participation. This is also crucial for equity and inclusive growth. The education, training and 
employment policies of the Member States must focus on increasing and adapting skills and 
providing better learning opportunities at all levels, to develop a workforce that is high skilled 
and  responsive  to  the  needs  of  the  economy.  Improving  the  equity  and  efficiency  of  EU 
education  and  training  systems  is  essential  to  avoid  the  waste  of  its  human  and  financial 
resources, increase employability and reduce inequalities42. 

The Europe 2020 flagship initiative 'Youth on the Move' announces a Commission proposal 
for  a  Council  Recommendation  and  emphasises  the  need  to  improve  quality  and  equity  in 
education  and  training,  to  provide  more  young  people  with  the  necessary  competences  to 
become  lifelong  learners  and  to  give  more  young  people  the  chance  to  experience  learning 
mobility. 

4. 

SECTION 4: POLICY OPTIONS 

Section  2.4  outlines  the  main  policy  requirements  to  address  ESL  effectively.  They  are 
reflected in the operational objectives and also underlie the definition of policy options. 

A key argument of section 2.4 is that the implementation of individual initiatives and projects, 
though  often  successful  in  their  specific  area,  fails  to  address  the  complexity  of  ESL 

39 

40 
41 
42 

Commission  Communication  "Europe  2020  -  A  strategy  for  smart,  sustainable  and  inclusive  growth" 
COM(2010) 2020; Conclusions of the European Council 17 June 2010 
Conclusions of the European Council, 25/26 March 2010. 
COM(2010) 2020. 
Commission Communication “Efficiency and Equity in Education and Training Systems” - COM(2006) 
481, 8.9.2006. 

EN 

22 

   EN 

                                                 
processes.  Single  initiatives  or  projects  need  to  be  embedded  in  a  broader  policy  context. 
Continuing  with  the  support  of  single  and  often  isolated  initiatives  risks  failing  to  tackle 
adequately  the  combination  of  socio-economic,  family,  community  and  education  related 
factors in ESL processes. This calls for a broader, coordinated and comprehensive approach to 
reducing  ESL.  The  differences  between  countries  and  regions  call  at  the  same  time  for 
flexibility in developing and applying policies against ESL. Measures should be targeted and 
adapted  to  the  concrete  situation,  built  on  existing  successful  initiatives  or  integrate  them 
effectively. 

Policy  approaches  can  range  from  identifying  and  promoting  some  specific  and  well 
evaluated  measures  which  can  reasonably  be  expected  to  be  beneficial  whatever  the 
combination of causes of ESL (e.g. improved guidance or targeted support for pupils at risk of 
dropping-out), to the promotion of a more ambitious policy framework which covers the main 
aspects of successful policies against ESL, extends beyond measures likely to be universally 
applicable, and allows for a flexible adaptation.  

The identification of individual measures which all Member States should implement requires 
clear evidence that these measures improve the situation in all Member States and under all 
conditions.  Existing  research  underlines  that  there  is  no  effective  universal  answer  to  ESL. 
Improving  guidance  and  career  counselling  is  a  measure  which  can  be  very  effective  in  the 
context of developed VET systems,43 but does not provide an ideal solution to countries with 
an  underdeveloped  VET  system  and  a  lack  of  credible  training  offers  for  young  people  in 
disadvantaged  areas.  Practically  all  measures  against  ESL  will  be  more  or  less  effective 
depending on their setting. 

The design of a policy framework can take different forms. It would not be useful to seek to 
discuss all theoretical options here. The overview and the structure presented in section 2.4 is 
based on an in-depth literature review, the results of the cluster 'Access and Social Inclusion 
in  Education  and  Training',  and  feedback  on  draft  versions  of  the  framework  from  a  wide 
range of stakeholders and experts. It defines four groups of measures: 

•  Measures  to  increase  the  evidence  base,  improve  monitoring  of  policies  against 

ESL and ensure its consistency with other relevant policies 

•  Measures to prevent ESL processes from occurring 

•  Measures to intervene in ESL processes early, effectively and efficiently 

•  Measures  to  provide  learning  opportunities  and  support  for  those  who  left 

education and training prematurely 

Following the discussions with stakeholders and experts, it has been decided to recommend a 
policy framework. Given the strong subsidiarity in the area of education and the diversity of 
education  systems,  it  would  be  neither  possible  nor  desirable  to  impose  a  single  solution 
common  to  all  Member  States.  Neither  our  review  of  research  nor  the  consultation  of 

43 

Germany  introduced  in  2010  at  federal  level  a  programme  to  support  guidance  ('Bildungsketten', 
www.bmbf.de/de/14737.php), an Austrian survey on drop-outs concluded that pupils left education and 
training  because  they  were  unsure  as  to  what  profession  they  wish  to  pursue.  Jugendliche 
Schulabbrecher in Österreich, Vienna 2004.  

EN 

23 

   EN 

                                                 
stakeholders have revealed any substantive option other than a policy framework for tackling 
the diverse phenomenon of ESL effectively and efficiently. 

•  A  policy  framework  against  ESL  is  therefore  presented  as  the  sole  content  based 
alternative to the baseline scenario. It is defined as option B. The sub-options B1 and B2 
reflect the possible legislative instruments, which are available to the EU under the Treaty 
and could support  the  implementation of the policy framework. Given that this is a field 
where  the  EU  cannot  act  directly,  all  options  (including  the  baseline  scenario)  have  in 
common  that  they  depend  on  the  commitment  of  Member  States  to  ensuring  the 
effectiveness and efficiency of their policy approaches and measures. 

4.1. 

Option A (baseline scenario) 

This scenario is described in its main characteristics in section 2 above. This option requires 
no further legislative action. Within this baseline scenario it is possible to continue the work 
within  the  OMC  by  establishing  a  new  thematic  working  group  on  ESL  and  conduct  peer 
learning activities, to reinforce the process of policy learning and so increase the effectiveness 
of  measures  taken.  The  agenda  for  this  continued  cooperation  would  need  to  be  agreed 
between the participating Member States and the Commission. Given that the current OMC 
structure is limited to education and training, and in the absence of a formal commitment of 
Member  States  to  a  wider  cross-sectoral  approach  to  ESL,  the  possibilities  to  broaden  the 
OMC and involve sectors other than education and training remain limited. The elements of 
evidence-based, comprehensive and consistent policies can be presented by the Commission 
and discussed by Member States, but there would be no formal commitment on their part to 
such an approach as a basis for future policy development. Funding within the LLP, the ESF 
and the RTD framework programme could prioritise effective policies and measures against 
ESL; elements of evidence-based, comprehensive  and consistent  policies against ESL could 
be used to give more guidance to beneficiaries and to improve their initiatives. 

4.2. 

Option B (Policy Framework) 

The  policy  framework  provides  Member  States  with  a  tool  which  helps  them  to  develop 
national policies against ESL following a holistic approach. It stresses the need to improve the 
availability and analysis of data underlying ESL without stipulating a specific method or form 
of  data  collection.  It  argues  for  a  better  monitoring  of  policies  against  ESL  as  well  as  for 
comprehensive  policies  against  ESL  and  a  better  cooperation  between  all  policy  areas 
affecting  directly  or  indirectly  young  people  and  especially  those  at  risk  of  dropping  out. 
Proposed measures on prevention, intervention and compensation of ESL are based on tested 
and evaluated policy measures in Member States and can be adapted to the concrete situation 
within  other  Member  States.  The  framework  can  also  serve  as  an  agenda  for  future 
cooperation between Member States, steer future policy development on EU level and guide 
the effective and efficient use of EU funding. 

Its  added  value  is  to  lay  a  foundation  for  further  work  within  the  Member  States  and  at 
European level, to guide effectively the cooperation between Member States and to provide a 
good starting point for developing effective and efficient policies against ESL. A draft of the 
policy framework is annexed to this report (annex 1). 

It should be noted that option B is not a self-contained option; it needs an instrument for its 
implementation.  Options  B.1  and  B.2  describe  different  approaches  to  promote  and 
implement  the  policy  framework  using  different legal  instruments.  While  the  content  of  the 

EN 

24 

   EN 

policy  framework  remains  unchanged,  the  use  of  different  instruments  to  implement  it  will 
lead to different results and impacts. 

4.3. 

Sub-option B.1 (Commission Communication or Recommendation) 

The  Commission  adopts  a  Communication  or  Recommendation  which  describes  the  policy 
framework for effective and efficient policies against ESL. It can be used by Member States 
for  their  policy  development  and  provides  a  relevant  overview  of  research  results  and 
European  experiences.  As  a  reference  document  it  can  give  additional  thematic  input  in 
further cooperation within ET2020 and help to agree on a common agenda within a thematic 
working group. However, cross-sectoral  cooperation will still remain  relatively limited. The 
policy  framework  helps  in  the  development  and  evaluation  of  policies  to  address  the  ESL 
target in Europe 2020. It can be accompanied by an information campaign in Member States 
to draw attention to the need for comprehensive and evidence-based approaches in combating 
ESL and to contribute to ongoing debates in Member States. However, as in option A, there 
would be no formal commitment of Member States to such an approach as a basis for future 
policy  development.  Comparative  research  and  the  use  of  already  existing  possibilities  to 
support  initiatives  within  ESF,  the  Lifelong  Learning  Programme  and  other  EU  funding 
programmes can also support the development of comprehensive and evidence-based policies 
against ESL.  

4.4. 

Sub-option B.2 (Council Recommendation) 

The  Council  adopts  a  Recommendation  which  describes  the  policy  framework  for  effective 
and efficient policies against ESL. The Council Recommendation provides a basis for further 
cooperation  among  Member  States  and  should  also  form  the  basis  for  the  development  of 
more  effective  policies  and  measures  against  ESL  in  Member  States.  It  helps  in  the 
development  and  evaluation  of  policies  to  address  the  ESL  target  in  Europe  2020.  Member 
States,  who  do  not  yet  have  a  policy  against  ESL,  can  use  it  to  develop  a  national  policy 
framework.  Other  Member  States  may  use  the  policy  framework  to  assess  and  revise  their 
existing policies. 

A broadened and cross-sectoral process under the OMC will focus mainly on the development 
of evidence-based, consistent and comprehensive policy approaches against ESL. It will help 
to  define  the  agenda  of  a  newly  established  thematic  working  group  and  to  guide  peer 
learning.  It  goes  beyond  the  current  state  of  art  which  is  limited  to  providing  good  practice 
examples  addressing  a  specific  aspect  of  ESL  or  specific  groups.  The  main  aim  within  the 
OMC is to exchange experiences in cross-sectoral policy development and mainstreaming of 
measures  against  ESL.  Including  e.g.  social  policy  and  youth  policy  systematically  in 
strategies  against  ESL  extends  also  the  scope  of  cooperation  between  Member  States.  It 
addresses experts and Member State representatives from policy areas others than education 
and training. Comparative research and the use of existing possibilities to support initiatives 
within  ESF,  the  Lifelong  Learning  Programme  and  other  EU  funding  programmes 
complement  the  approach.  Their  use  can  be  improved  by  targeting  funding  opportunities 
better  and  by  measuring  them  against  their  contribution  to  comprehensive  policies  against 
ESL in Member States. 

4.5. 

Option C (Funding programme) 

In  order  to  launch  targeted  initiatives  EU  funding  could  be  made  available  for  specific 
measures against ESL at EU level, especially for comparative research and for pilot projects 

EN 

25 

   EN 

which involve several Member States and provide European added value. It could especially 
target funding for initiatives which involve cross-sectoral cooperation, are based on evidence 
and support the development of new and innovative forms of cooperation. In times of crisis it 
could offer funding for initiatives which would otherwise not be feasible due to budget cuts. 
A  targeted  funding  programme  would  need  a  very  specific  definition  in  order  to  avoid 
overlaps  with  existing  funding  programmes;  it  could  raise  awareness  in  Member  States  and 
trigger the development of new initiatives. 

5. 

SECTION 5: ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS 

To  reduce  ESL  rates  will  have  significant  economic  and  social  impacts.  These  impacts  are 
comparable for all policy options, and it can be assumed that to a certain extent all approaches 
will  achieve  success  in  reducing  ESL  rates  at  European  and  at  national  level.  They  can  be 
summarised as follows: 

•  Increase  of  skill  levels  and  employability  of  young  people,  improved  well-being,  health 

status, and living conditions of young people. 

•  Reduced risk of poverty and social exclusion and limited dependency on social assistance; 

better social cohesion in European societies. 

•  Decrease of skill mismatches, provision of better qualified employees and thus support of 

economic growth. 

These  impacts  are  in  line  with  the  general  objectives  of  the  initiative.  The  different  policy 
options  are  likely  to  contribute  differently  to  their  achievement  depending  on  the  expected 
speed and success in reducing ESL in Europe. 

There  are  only  limited  environmental  impacts  such  as  a  possible  impact  of  education  on 
environmentally  aware  behaviour.  They  are  not  significantly  different  between  the  different 
options.  Therefore  it  has  been  decided  not  to  explore  the  environmental  impacts  in  more 
detail. 

There  is  no  impact  on  administrative  burdens  due  to  new  information  requirements.  The 
monitoring  and  evaluation  of  policies  against  ESL  can  be  organised  within  the  existing 
reporting  framework.  There  are  no  additional  compliance  costs.  Costs  related  to  attending 
meetings  within  the  OMC  will  not  increase  compared  to  the  baseline  scenario  described  in 
section 2. In section 6 the report will discuss the possible costs linked to implementation of 
measures  against  ESL  in  Member  States.  They  do  not  constitute  administrative  burdens 
directly linked to one of the policy options under consideration. Also direct impacts on third 
countries  are  not  expected;  better  competitiveness  of  European  economies  due  to  reduced 
ESL rates might have an impact on third countries, but that cannot be assessed. Reducing ESL 
will improve the implementation of children's right to education; there is no other impact on 
human rights. 

5.1. 

Discarded option 

A specific funding programme as proposed in Option C above could increase the number of 
initiatives  against  ESL.  But  it  risks  overlapping  with  existing  funding  schemes  such  as 
European  Social  Fund  and  the  Lifelong  Learning  Programme.  In  addition  a  new  funding 
scheme would not respond well to the operational objectives identified above, particularly as 
regards  securing  commitment  and  comprehensive  action  at  Member  State  level.  It  tends  to 

EN 

26 

   EN 

support  policy  approaches  focussing  on  individual  measures  which  have  been  identified  as 
less  beneficial  (see  section  4).  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  an  additional  funding  scheme 
cannot be justified and should be excluded from further consideration.  

The impact assessment will focus solely on comparing the baseline scenario (option A) with 
the added value of a policy framework (option B) which is either supported by a Commission 
Communication or Recommendation (option B1) or a Council Recommendation (option B2). 
All  selected  options  are  feasible.  It  should  be  underlined  that  the  impact  of  each  option 
depends largely on the relevant initiatives taken in Member States. Each option can promote 
the  implementation  of  evidence-based,  comprehensive  and  consistent  policies  against  ESL. 
The  decision  for  one  or  the  other  would  probably  not  change  materially  the  content  of  the 
preferred  policy  option,  but  the  options  differ  considerably  in  their  capacity  to  deliver  the 
expected results. 

5.2. 

Option A: Baseline scenario 

Social  and  economic  impacts:  Recent  developments  show  that  in  most  Member  States  ESL 
rates  have  decreased  rather  slowly  and  not  sufficiently  in  comparison  with  the  European 
benchmark. In some countries the ESL rate even increased after the launch of the OMC. It is 
very  likely  that  in  this  scenario  the  positive  social  and  economic  impacts  of  reducing  ESL 
rates will accrue too slowly and be too small to counteract the difficult economic, fiscal and 
social circumstances in Member States resulting from the economic crisis. 

Increased  effectiveness  of  policies  against  early  school  leaving:  In  the  framework  of  the 
existing OMC, support for policy development is based on the exchange of experiences and 
good  practice.  The  results  of  the  Cluster  on  "Access  and  Social  Inclusion  in  Lifelong 
Learning"  provide  additional  input,  but  do  not  propose  a  policy  framework  or  provide 
guidelines for policies against ESL. The publication of the results as well as current research 
findings  in  the  format  of  a  policy  handbook  would  have  some  positive  impact  in  different 
Member  States,  but  the  format  (a  Staff  Working  Document  of  the  Commission)  would  not 
guarantee policy attention within the Member States. 

The  up-take  of  future  results  is  therefore  difficult  to  predict,  but  would  probably  remain 
limited  and  patchy  from  country  to  country,  depending  on  each  country’s  participation  and 
interest in the OMC. The limitations of the current OMC, mainly evident in the difficulties to 
disseminate the results of working groups more effectively, will also hamper up-take. There is 
a  risk 
the  baseline  scenario  would  not  sufficiently  promote  evidence-based, 
comprehensive  and  consistent  policy  evidence,  and  so  would  not  sufficiently  increase  the 
effectiveness  and  efficiency  of  measures  against  ESL.  Even  big  increases  in  investment  in 
policies  against  ESL  can  turn  out  to  be  insufficient  if  made  within  the  context  of  patchy  or 
poorly targeted approaches. 

that 

Cooperation  and  the  exchange  of  good  practice  among  MS:  The  current  OMC  provides  an 
opportunity for Member States to discuss the negative effects of the economic crisis on ESL, 
their  current  policies  and  future  strategies.  It  offers  the  chance  to  compare  the  different 
approaches taken and learn from existing experiences. Looking at the experiences in ET2010, 
there  is  a  need  to  improve  the  dissemination  of  results.  Nevertheless  a  agenda  for  this 
cooperation agreed at the level of the Council is currently missing and there is a risk that the 
exchange  of  good  practice  would  not  be  sufficiently  focused  to  support  Member  States 
effectively in their policy development. 

EN 

27 

   EN 

Cross-sectoral  cooperation:  The  implementation  arrangements  for  the  ET2020  strategic 
framework  currently  remain  limited  to  education  and  training.  This  can  be  seen  as  a  key 
shortcoming of option A. Limiting the exchange of experience and good practice to education 
and  training  policies  risks  to  narrow  subsequent  policy  developments.  The  perspective  of 
other  policy  areas  such  as  employment  policy,  social  and  youth  policy  cannot  be  integrated 
systematically.  On  national,  regional  and  local  level  option  A  depends  on  the  policy 
developments  within  Member  States  and  so  would  not  provide  a  strong  tool  for  fostering 
comprehensive and consistent policies. 

Reinforced  commitment  of  Member  States  to  launch  policies  against  early  school  leaving: 
With the adoption of national targets on reducing ESL, it can be assumed that Member States 
are  committed  to  taking  targeted  action  to  reach  their  targets.  But  the  continuation  of  the 
current  OMC  would  not  offer  any  additional  support  commensurate  with  its  greater  policy 
priority.  

Better  targeted  use  of  ESF  and  LLP:  Additional  comparative  research  launched  by  the 
Commission  would  contribute  to  the  evidence  base  for  effective  policies  against  ESL.  EU 
funds  can  be  used  to  support  more  initiatives  against  ESL,  but  project  funding  does  not  in 
itself  lead  to  the  development  of  evidence-based,  consistent  and  comprehensive  policies 
against  ESL.  There  is  a  risk  that  it  would  perpetuate  the  current  situation,  in  which  many 
initiatives  against  ESL  work  in  parallel  and  are  only  insufficiently  coordinated.  Currently 
there  is  no  agreed  policy  approach  to  ESL  which  could  help  to  focus  funding  more 
effectively. 

5.3. 

Option B: Implementing a policy framework against ESL 

The impact generated by the proposed policy framework against ESL depends strongly on the 
way it is implemented. Before analysing its impacts with regard to the operational objectives 
in sub-options B1 and B2, we focus on the expected impacts of the policy framework as such. 

The  framework  would  address  the  identified  policy  shortcomings  in  Member  States  and 
answer to the policy requirements as defined in section 2. Its impact is highly dependent on 
the  concrete  setting  in  which  measures  are  implemented.  Not  every  measure  is  equally 
effective and efficient in all settings; the framework would respond to that by providing a set 
of measures to prevent ESL, intervene in ESL processes and compensate for missed learning. 

The policy framework would stress the need to base any initiative to reduce ESL on evidence. 
Evidence-based strategies also ensure the use of those measures which have the potential to 
achieve  the  best  success.  Monitoring  also  helps  to  adapt  policies  in  case  the  situation  has 
changed or measures failed to deliver the expected results. Countries using this approach have 
already shown significant reduction in their ESL rates (e.g. The Netherlands). 

The  impact  of  a  consistent  and  comprehensive  approach  in  addressing  ESL  is  likely  to  go 
beyond  the  impact  of  individual  measures.  Measures  can  mutually  support  each  other  and 
create  synergies.  It  also  avoids  imbalances  between  the  different  measures  taken  or  even 
contradictory measures in different policy areas. 

•  Measures  to  prevent  ESL  processes  from  occurring  are  most  efficient  as  they  avoid  the 
experience  of  school  failure  and  alienation.  They  improve  compulsory  education  for  all 
children and show positive impacts in other areas of school education. 

EN 

28 

   EN 

•  Measures  to  intervene  early,  effectively  and  efficiently  in  processes  that  risk  leading  to 

ESL show strong impacts on motivation of pupils to stay in education and training. 

•  Compensatory measures provide learning opportunities and support for those who have left 
education and training prematurely. They raise skill levels and provide new perspective for 
those who have 'failed' in the mainstream system and are at risk of social exclusion. 

The  framework  would  give  an  overview  of  possible  policy  measures  to  address  all  these 
elements. It could be used by Member States as a tool to revise and improve their policies. In 
this way it would support more efficient and effective ways to reduce ESL; this is of utmost 
importance in times of crisis and austerity. It would invite Member States also to examine and 
to learn better from one another how to intensify their initiatives with limited budgets, where 
to  set  priorities,  and  where  to  expect  the  highest  return  for  investments  in  measures  against 
ESL. This is highly relevant for all Member States, whether they have reached the benchmark 
or not. 

Assuming  that  all  Member  States  develop  and  apply  the  framework,  it  would  promote  the 
development  of  evidence-based,  comprehensive  and  consistent  policies  throughout  the  EU. 
This has a high potential to reduce ESL rates faster and more efficiently. As mentioned above, 
its  added  value  is  to  lay  a  foundation  for  further  work  within  the  Member  States  and  at 
European level; it provides the content related input to both sub-options mentioned below. 

5.4. 

Sub-Option B.1: Commission Communication or Recommendation 

Social  and  economic  impacts:  A  Commission  Communication  or  Recommendation  can 
support Member States in reducing ESL, but it risks receiving more limited policy attention in 
the  Member  States  because  it  is  not  adopted  by  the  Council.  It  is  very  likely  that  in  this 
scenario  the  positive  social  and  economic  impacts  of  reducing  ESL  rates  will  accrue  too 
slowly and be too small to counteract the difficult economic, fiscal and social circumstances 
in Member States resulting from the economic crisis. 

leaving:  A  Commission 
Increased  effectiveness  of  policies  against  early  school 
Communication  or  Recommendation  promoting  the  policy  framework  would  provide 
additional input to the development of evidence-based, comprehensive and consistent policies 
at  European  and  national  level.  But  it  can  be  assumed  that  a  Communication  or 
Recommendation  might  have  more  inconsistent  impacts  in  different  Member  States, 
depending on the level of attention it received. 

Cooperation  and  the  exchange  of  good  practice  among  MS:  The  current  OMC  provides  an 
opportunity  for  Member  States 
the 
Communication/ Recommendation could provide a basis for future cooperation by setting an 
agenda for thematic working groups, peer-learning and comparative research. 

to  exchange  good  practice  and  experiences; 

Cross-sectoral  cooperation:  A  Commission  Communication/  Recommendation  would  not 
directly  influence  the  scope  of  the  OMC  nor  extend  cross-sectoral  cooperation  at  European 
level, because it commits the Commission, but not the Member States. Further development 
of  policies  against  ESL  would  therefore  probably  continue  to  focus  largely  on  education 
policy,  but  in  comparison  to  the  baseline  scenario,  there  would  be  more  emphasis  on  the 
importance of cross-sectoral approaches, even if there is in this scenario no new instrument to 
address  this  need.  On  national,  regional  or  local  level  it  would  depend  on  decisions  within 
Member States on the role of cross-sectoral cooperation. 

EN 

29 

   EN 

Reinforced commitment of Member States to launch policies against early school leaving: A 
Commission Communication or Recommendation reflects the commitment and opinion solely 
of the Commission. Although its content would be based on the work of the Member States in 
the Cluster "Access and Social Inclusion", the instrument would not offer Member States the 
opportunity  to  take  ownership  of  the  resulting  policy  framework.  This  risks  reducing  the 
influence of the proposal on policy development in Member States. Given the importance of 
the  ESL  target  within  Europe  2020,  it  is  judged  that  a  Communication  or  Recommendation 
offers rather a weak instrument to support policy development in Member States. 

Better  targeted  use  of  ESF  and  LLP:  Additional  comparative  research  launched  by  the 
Commission  can  contribute  to  the  evidence  base  and  the  further  development  of  effective 
policies  against  ESL.  The  LLP  as  well  as  ESF  funds  can  be  used  to  support  individual 
initiatives against ESL, but possibilities to focus funding more effectively remain limited. 

5.5. 

Sub-option B.2: Council Recommendation 

Social and economic impacts: It is assumed that a Council Recommendation would enhance 
the  development  of  evidence-based,  comprehensive  and  consistent  policies  against  ESL  in 
Member States. This should lead to a faster reduction of ESL rates and a faster achievement 
of the desired economic and social impacts. 

Increased  effectiveness  of  policies  against  early  school  leaving:  By  defining  the  policy 
framework  with  the  formal  backing  of  the  Council,  the  Recommendation  would  support 
Member States in their policy development and should help to speed up the implementation of 
evidence-based and well targeted measures against ESL. The approach addresses all relevant 
actors  at  all  levels  of  education  and  training  and  provides  a  complete  set  of  measures  in 
analysing, preventing and compensating ESL. 

Cooperation and the exchange of good practice among MS: A broadened and cross-sectoral 
process  of  cooperation  under  the  OMC  could  be  launched  on  the  back  of  a  Council 
Recommendation addressed to Member States as a whole, not just to in respect of education. 
This would foster policy development at EU level and would give feedback to Member States 
to  help  make  policy  design  against  ESL  more  effective.  It  would  include  different 
perspectives and policy sectors and would allow for a broader scope in addressing ESL. The 
range of good practice to be examined and exchanged would be wider. The Recommendation 
would set out a clear agenda and define a new focus for future cooperation. 

Cross-sectoral  cooperation:  Cross-sectoral  cooperation  under  the  OMC  would  be  a  strong 
feature  of  this  scenario  on  at  European,  national,  regional  and  local  levels.  The  broadened 
process would address a major weakness in current policy development. Comparative studies 
can also contribute to the knowledge base, analyse effective and efficient approaches in cross-
sectoral cooperation and measure its effects. 

Reinforced  commitment  of  Member  States  to  launch  policies  against  early  school  leaving: 
The  process  of  discussing  and  adoption  of  the  Recommendation  within  the  Council  would 
offer Member States an instrument to take position concerning the future policy needs in this 
area. 

Option  B2  offers  the  strongest  commitment  of  Member  States  in  the  development  of  the 
policy  framework.  Discussions  within  the  Education  Committee  and  the  Council  would 
provide relevant input in creating a policy framework which is applicable for Member States. 
The Council Recommendation should therefore lead to a greater engagement, understanding 

EN 

30 

   EN 

and  political  commitment  than  any  of  the  other  scenarios,  which  commit  only  the 
Commission. 

Better  targeted  use  of  ESF  and  LLP:  Additional  comparative  research  launched  by  the 
Commission  can  contribute  to  the  evidence  base  and  the  further  development  of  effective 
policies against ESL. Based on the Council Recommendation, LLP as well as ESF funds can 
be used in a much  more focused manner and in this way better support the development of 
evidence-based, comprehensive and consistent policies against ESL. 

Chart 7: Policy-option matrix comparing options A, B and C 

Option A 

Option B 

Option B1 

Option B2 

Slow, at the same speed as before. 

Slow 

Speed in 
reducing ESL 

Social impacts 

Economic 
impacts 

Slowly developing positive social 
impacts. To fail in reducing ESL 
perpetuates social costs, social 
disadvantage and the 
intergenerational transmission of 
social and educational 
disadvantage. 

Limited economic gains, also due 
to effects of economic crisis. To 
fail in reducing ESL increases 
economic costs, sharpens negative 
effects of the crisis on early 
leavers. Persisting skill mismatches 
may hamper economic recovery. 

Increased 
effectiveness  

Development at EU level, limited 
development at national level.  

Continuation of existing OMC 

Cooperation 
and the 
exchange of 
good practice 

Cross-sectoral 
cooperation 

Only within MS and on the basis of 
their policy development 

Reinforced 
commitment of 
Member States  

New impetus for policies against 
ESL due to Europe 2020, NRPs 
and the headline target on ESL.  

Slowly developing 
positive social 
impacts. 

Limited economic 
gains, also due to 
effects of economic 
crisis. 

Development at EU 
level. Provision of 
input in policy 
development; 
limited up-take at 
national level. 

Continuation of 
existing OMC and 
new thematic input 

Only within MS and 
on the basis of their 
policy development; 
Supporting message 
from the EC 

See Option A 

Faster  due  to  more  efficient 
policies. 

Earlier realisation of social 
improvements 
Reduced transmission of 
disadvantage 

Earlier realisation of 
economic gains. Faster 
increase in skills and 
qualifications reduces skill 
mismatches and prevents 
more young people of long-
term unemployment. 

Development at EU level, 
support of national policy 
development and better up-
take of recommendations 

Broadened and cross-sectoral 
process under OMC, clear 
agenda setting for 
cooperation 

Systematic support of cross-
sectoral cooperation. 
Exchange of best practice on 
national/ regional/ local level; 

Clear agenda setting by MS 
and EC; increased 
commitment of MS to further 
develop policy 

Better targeted 
use ESF/ LLP 

Lack of thematic basis for better 
targeted use 

See Option A 

Streamlining of funding in 
LLP and ESF 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
6. 

SECTION 6: COMPARING THE OPTIONS 

Based  on  the  analysis  of  the  different  possible  policy  options,  this  section  compares  their 
impacts on the objectives of the initiative. None of the options is expected to have a negative 
impact  on  the  objectives.  Even  with  the  baseline  scenario,  it  can  be  expected  that  the 
continuation of the current work will lead to a slow positive impact. 

Chart 8: Ranking criteria 

+ + 

+ 

0 

- 

- - 

Positive impact  Small positive impact  Neutral impact Small negative impact  Negative impact

The  objectives  and  assessment  criteria  are  strongly  interlinked.  It  is  therefore  difficult  to 
identify  different  weightings  for  each  criterion.  Giving  equal  weight  to  all  objectives 
corresponds  best  to  this  situation.  The  comparison  below  also  indicates  that  even  with  this 
approach the picture is unambiguous. 

Chart 9: Ranking of options A and B (B1 and B2) 

Option 
A 

Option 
B1 

Option 
B2 

General objectives 

•  To  contribute  to  the  development  of  quality  education  by 
encouraging  cooperation  between  Member  States  and  by 
supporting and supplementing their action 

0 

+ 

++ 

Specific objective 

•  Reduction  of  the  average  ESL  rate  in  the  EU  to  less  than 

10% 

•  Increase of skill levels and employability of young people 

•  Decrease of the risk of poverty and social exclusion 

Operational objectives 

•  Increased  effectiveness  of  policies  against  early  school 

leaving 

•  Member  States  improve  data  and  information 
gathering,  laying  a  foundation  for  evidence-based 
policy development 

•  Member  States 

the 
effectiveness and efficiency of their initiatives and 
developed a consistent strategy against ESL 

improve 

revise 

and 

•  Cooperation and exchange of good practice among Member 
States  is  supported  by  thematic  working  groups,  peer-

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

++ 

++ 

+ 

++ 

++ 

++ 

+ 

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
learning activities, seminars and conferences 

•  Increase  of  cross-sectoral  cooperation  by  extending 
membership of thematic expert groups beyond E+T sector, 
by  cooperating  with  other  Commissions  services  and 
stakeholders 

•  Reinforced  Commitment  of  Member  States  to  launch 

policies against early school leaving 

•  Member States actions are complemented by targeted use of 
ESF and LLP funding, by launching comparative studies on 
EU level and by supporting data and information gathering, 
analysis and policy development. 

0 

+ 

++ 

0 

0 

0 

0 

++ 

++ 

Option B2, a Council Recommendation, answers best to the objectives of the initiative as it 
supports best the use and the implementation of the policy framework. It respects the different 
situations  within  Member  States,  builds  on  existing  experiences  and  is  adaptable  to  their 
specific circumstances. It provides additional thematic input, gives new impetus to the OMC 
and involves Member States strongly in the development of the policy framework. In this way 
it can also be assumed that this option implies  the  highest  level  of  commitment  of  Member 
States,  has  the  potential  to  influence  policy  development  in  Member  States  most  positively 
and so must help reducing ESL rates in Europe.  

The  Recommendation  will  add  value  to  Member  States’  efforts  by  supporting  them  in 
developing policies that identify the causes of and address early school leaving in a lifelong 
learning perspective, tackle it as a phenomenon that cuts across several related policy areas, 
involve all stakeholders, and make policy interventions more systematic and consistent. 

The  potential  of  the  approach  is  demonstrated  by  the  few  countries  in  Europe  which  have 
developed  comprehensive  strategies  against  ESL.  Their  experiences  will  be  very  important 
within the future cooperation process between Member States. 

Compared  to  the  other  options  the  Council  Recommendation  represents  the  strongest  legal 
instrument possible under the Treaty. This seems to be justified with regard to the importance 
of the target and the urgency to reduce ESL. 

None  of  the  options  provides  a  guarantee  for  success  and  the  degree  of  success  depends 
strongly on policy development within Member States and on future economic developments. 
The choice between the options is therefore based on the estimated potential of each option. 
An important aspect is the speed with which the target to reduce ESL can be achieved. It has 
major social and economic impacts. 

•  Option A provides only little additional input and it cannot be expected that it will lead to 

an accelerated reduction in ESL. 

•  The most distinctive difference between option B1 and B2 is the involvement of Member 
States in developing and adopting the policy framework. The greater level of involvement 
in  option  B2  should  make  it  more  likely  that  Member  States  will  apply  it.  From  the 
analysis  in  section  6  it  can  be  concluded  that  Option  B2  might  achieve  considerable  and 
sustainable reductions in ESL rates faster than option A and B1. 

EN 

33 

   EN 

Cost – effectiveness of policies against ESL 

Introducing  evidence-based  and  comprehensive  policies  to  combat  ESL  will  require 
investment in structures as well as concrete initiatives or measures. This need for additional 
investment  is  already  implicit  in  the  establishment  of  national  targets  as  part  of  the  Europe 
2020  strategy.  Member  States  are  taking  and  will  take  action  to  reduce  ESL.  Their  current 
spending on measures against ESL has to be taken into account when assessing the costs of 
implementing a national strategy following the proposed policy framework. 

To  estimate  the  costs  of  introducing  evidence  based,  comprehensive  and  consistent  policies 
against ESL in Europe is - based on the existing data and information - practically impossible. 
The necessary investment of Member States depends on  

•  Current  ESL  rates:  countries  with  low  ESL  rates  might  target  only  groups  especially 
affected  and  limit  investments.  Others  may  have  to  increase  efforts  across  the  board  to 
lower their ESL rates. 

•  Ambitions  in  reducing  ESL:  Depending  on  the  national  targets  more  or  less  investment 
might be needed. In case of high ESL rates and the ambition to achieve a major reduction 
by 2020, major investments might be needed. 

•  Existing policy: Some countries developed in recent years targeted policies to reduce ESL. 
Implementing  the  Recommendation  might  be  a  tool  for  them  to  revise  their  policy  and 
search  for  further  improvements.  It  might  not  therefore  require  additional  investments. 
Others  might  reorganize  their  current  approaches  or  complement  them  by  introducing 
additional  measures.  The  additional  amount  spent  will  depend  on  current  expenditure  in 
this area, and may be offset by efficiency gains compared with funding a more scattered 
and atomized approach. 

•  The  characteristics  of  ESL  and  the  type  of  measures  needed:  Depending  on  the  concrete 
situation  different  types  of  investments  are  needed.  Investments  can  also  serve  more 
purposes  than  only  the  reduction  of  early  school  leaving.  For  instance,  early  childhood 
education  and  care  reduces  not  only  drop-out  but  improves  educational  attainment  in 
general and has positive social and personal benefits that impart on indirect costs. 

•  Comparable  measures  may  create  different  costs  in  different  settings:  For  instance, 
strengthening VET education as one alternative to drop-out can start from different levels 
and comprise different measures and investments. The same holds for all other measures 
proposed in the policy framework. 

ESL  is  too  complex  a  phenomenon  to  allow  for  valid  but  simple  calculations.  A  sound 
analysis of the needs within a country is the only possible starting point for cost estimations. 

The  costs  for  data  gathering  and  monitoring  of  developments,  a  pre-condition  for  the 
development  of  evidence  based  policies,  can  also  differ  greatly.  Nevertheless  there  are 
indications  that  these  costs  may  not  necessarily  be  high.  Often  it  requires  a  change  in  the 
reporting mechanisms and the management of data, rather than entirely new systems for data 
collection. In many countries schools already possess all the information needed in electronic 
format. Electronic submission of a broader data set to their authorities might amount to only a 

EN 

34 

   EN 

very  limited  burden.44  In  addition,  different  ways  to  gather  data  and  information  are 
conceivable. They can be more or less labour- and cost intensive. The Recommendation will 
not propose a specific form of data collection. 

There  is  only  limited  information  available  on  the  costs  incurred  by  existing  measures 
launched in Member States. A request in some Member States to provide basic data on costs 
of measures against ESL remained largely unanswered due to the difficulties to define these 
costs.  Many  measures  are  part  of  a  wider  set  of  investments  in  school  education  or  are 
financed from different budget lines. 45 For the reasons outlined above, the indication of costs 
of a certain measure in one Member State does not necessarily provide reliable estimations for 
the costs of a comparable measure in another Member State.46 

It is therefore more helpful to look at existing cost-effectiveness analyses for measures against 
ESL  or  school  failure.  In  section  2,  several  estimations  of  direct  and  indirect  costs  of  ESL 
have been set out. Although the estimation of indirect costs should be treated with caution, the 
comparison of costs of ESL and the costs of measures against ESL provides valuable insights. 

•  Cost-  effectiveness  analyses  exist  mainly  for  the  USA,47  and  to  a  much  lesser  extent  for 
European countries. A Californian study evaluated the success of different interventions to 
reduce  ESL  and  calculated  the  costs  per  additional  high  school  graduate.  Comparing  the 
costs  per  additional  high  school  graduate  with  the  projected  economic  gain,  the  study 
concluded that for all interventions that demonstrated clearly increased rates of high school 
graduation costs are substantially lower than benefits.48 The cost-benefit ratios ranged from 
1:1.5 to 1:5. 

•  A Dutch study compared the costs of measures against ESL with the costs created by ESL, 
looking at the different educational pathways, the incidence of ESL, and specific economic 
effects  of  dropping  out  at  a  certain  level  of  education.  The  total  costs  created  by  ESL, 
including social costs, costs related to criminality and loss of productivity, exceed by far 
the costs for most of the measures aiming to reduce ESL. Measures such as the alternation 
between work experiences and general education, improvements in the transition between 

44 
45 

46 

47 

48 

See: Kuehne, 2010, p.89. 
E. g. for France "Le ministère n'a communiqué aucune donnée d'ensemble, précisant a la Cour que 'le 
cout de la lutte contre l'échec scolaire est indéfinissable ' et que ' le fait de ne pas isoler le traitement de 
la politique de lutte contre l'échec scolaire dans les programme de la mission enseignement scolaire du 
budget de l'Etat procède d'un choix délibère dans la mesure ou la politique éducative dans une ensemble 
vise  a  prévenir  l'échec  scolaire  tout  au  long  de  la  scolarité."  Cour  de  comptes  France,  L'éducation 
nationale face a l'objectif de la réussite des tous les élèves, Mai 2010, p.65 
The new initiative 'Bildungsketten' in Germany intends to invest 362 Mio Euro for improving guidance, 
creating  1000  new  posts  at  schools  in  disadvantaged  areas  and  reaching  30.000  pupils  at  risk. 
(http://www.bmbf.de/press/2931.php). The budget foreseen reflects the specific cost factors within the 
German setting. It allows not for calculating the average costs of improved guidance. 
See George Psacharopoulos: The costs of School failure. A Feasibility Study. Analytical Report for the 
European Commission, June 2007. 
The  measures  included  tutoring  programmes,  pre-school  education,  reduced  class  size,  increased 
teacher salaries  and high schools  with  small  learning  communities.  Costs  per  student ranged between 
$3,190  and  $14,400.  Clive  R.  Belfield,  Henry  M.  Levin:  The  Return  on  Investment  for  Improving 
California's High School Graduation rate, Santa Barbara 2007. 

EN 

35 

   EN 

                                                 
school  levels,  improved  psychological  and  social  support  for  pupils,  and  improved 
guidance were clearly cost effective.49  

•  A  study  commissioned  by  the  Austrian  Ministry  of  Education,  Art  and  Culture  in  2007 
concluded also that in view of the high costs created by early school leaving practically all 
interventions which reduce its incidence are cost-efficient.50 

•  A literature review on education and child poverty, published by the Rowntree Foundation 
in  2007,  concluded  that  school  based  policies  can  effectively  raise  the  performance  of 
disadvantaged students and that this can be done cost-efficiently. The precondition is that 
spending  needs  to  be  appropriately  targeted.  The  report  mentions  especially  learning 
mentors and the provision of learning support to pupils in difficulties.51 

Evidence  on  the  cost-effectiveness  of  well  targeted  measures  against  ESL  come  to  two 
common  results:  measures  need  to  be  well  targeted  and  they  need  to  address  all  problems 
which hinder young people to achieve upper secondary qualifications. 

Moreover, it should be noted that a Recommendation would lead to no new obligatory costs 
for  Member  States,  and  should  indeed  lead  to  greater  efficiency  and  better  cost-benefit,  by 
improving the quality and effectiveness of policy design and implementation, through helping 
Member States learn from each other's experience 

7. 

SECTION 7: MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

As one of the headline targets in the EU’s Europe 2020 strategy, ESL will be subject to the 
reporting process adopted for that strategy. European targets in Europe 2020 are backed up by 
national  targets;  policies  to  reach  these  targets  are  the  subject  of  National  Reform 
Programmes  (NRP).  The  reports  from  Member  States  on  the  implementation  of  their  NRPs 
should provide detailed information on the progress towards reducing ESL and describe key 
measures taken by the Member States. It provides the basic source for measuring the impact 
of the Recommendation on policies against ESL in Member States. Together with reporting in 
the framework of the strategic framework for cooperation in education and training (ET 2020) 
and the annual ET 2020 Progress Reports by the Commission, as well as other sources such as 
Eurostat,  sufficient  data  and  information  should  be  available  to  monitor  developments  in 
Member  States  and  on  European  level,  without  requiring  any  new  reporting  process  for 
Member States relating to the Recommendation. Therefore the Recommendation will not lead 
to  any  additional  reporting  burden.  It  provides  thematic  support  in  developing  National 
Reform Programmes and the formulation of national policies against ESL.  

With regard to the proposed Recommendation, the legal text would foresee an implementation 
report  by  the  Commission;  the  timing  of  the  report  would  be  in  line  with  the  reporting  on 
Europe 2020. The report would be due approximately three years after adoption. This report 
would  analyse  the  developments  in  Member  States,  the  development  and  use  of  national 
policy frameworks against ESL and the range of measures taken. It would in addition analyse 

49 

50 

51 

Costs  per  pupil  ranged  between  120  EUR  for  improved  transition  between  school  types  and  13,900 
EUR for the extension of compulsory schooling. Roel in t'Veld et.al. Kosten en Baten van Voortijdig 
Schoolverlaten, May 2006, p.18 
Mario  Steiner,  Elfriede  Wagner:  Dropoutstrategie.  Grundlagen  zur  Prävention  und  Reintegration  von 
Dropouts in Ausbildung und Beschäftigung, Projektbericht 2007. 
Stephen  Machin,  Sandra  McNally:  Education  and  cild  poverty.  A  literature  review,  Joseph  Rowntree 
Foundation, 2006. 

EN 

36 

   EN 

                                                 
the  effectiveness  and  efficiency  of  the  policy  framework  and  would  lead  to  revision  of  that 
framework if needed. The report would cover the degree to which Member States have used 
the framework to develop national policies against ESL, whether the recommended measures 
proved  to  be  successful,  and  what  nature  of  educational,  social  and  economic  impacts  they 
had had. 

In  terms  of  ongoing  monitoring,  identification  and  exchange  of  good  practice  on  ESL 
reduction,  it  is  intended  that  the  adoption  of  the  Recommendation  would  be  followed  by 
establishment  of  a  new  Member  State  expert  group,  coordinated  by  the  Commission, 
involving  specialists  in  education,  social,  health  and  employment  policies.  This  would  also 
respond  to  the  proposal  by  the  French  delegation  at  the  July  2010  Ministerial  meeting  (see 
section 1 above). This group would be more tightly targeted on ESL issues than the former 
Cluster ‘Access and Social Inclusion’. It would be the forum for accelerating the process of 
learning  from  good  practice  within  the  EU,  for  assessing  the  effectiveness  of  the  policy 
framework  set  out  in  the  Recommendation,  and  formulating  proposals  for  further 
developments of that framework. 

Chart 10: Indicators to monitor and evaluate the initiative 

Title 

•  To reduce the 

average ESL rate in 
the EU to less than 
10%  

•  To increase skill 

levels in Europe and 
employability 

Type of 
indicator 

Impact 
indicator 

Impact 
indicator 

Indicator 

Definition 

Decrease of ESL rates 

European Labour Force 
Survey (LFS) 

Increased upper secondary 
completion 
Decrease of youth 
unemployment rates 

European Labour Force 
Survey (LFS) 

•  To decrease the risk 
of poverty and social 
exclusion 

Impact 
indicator 

Decrease of young people not 
in employment, education or 
training 

NEET indicator, based 
on LFS 

•  Increased 

Result indicator Number of MS developing 

effectiveness of 
policies against ESL 

•  Cooperation and the 
exchange of good 
practice among MS 

•  Increase of cross-

sectoral cooperation 

•  Reinforced 

commitment  

•  More targeted use of 

EU funding 

Indicator on 
cooperation 
process 

Indicator on 
cooperation 
process 

Indicator on 
cooperation 
process 

Indicator on 
cooperation 
process 

evidence based, 
comprehensive and consistent 
policies against ESL 

Number of MS participating 
actively in OMC 

Number of MS developing 
structures of cross-sectoral 
cooperation 

Number of MS taking 
concrete measures against 
ESL and revising their 
policies if needed 

National Reform 
Programmes; Survey on 
policy development in 
MS 

Progress Report 

National Reform 
Programmes 

National Reform 
Programmes 

Targeted and evidence-based 
measures financed 

Reporting from ESF, 
LLP, RTD 

EN 

37 

   EN 

7.1. 

Information and data on evaluating the success of the policy framework 

•  Reporting  within  Europe  2020,  reports  on  National  Reform  Programmes  and  their 

implementation 

•  Progress Report and reporting in ET 2020 

•  Evaluation of Member States' policies against ESL / Survey four years after adoption 

•  Peer-learning  within  cross-sectoral  OMC  involving  representatives  from  different  policy 

fields 

•  Regular meetings with experts and representatives from Member States 

•  Stakeholder platform meeting four years after adoption to review development in policies 

against ESL 

•  Analysis  of  data  on  ESL,  either  collected  on  EU  level  or  on  national  level;  comparative 

research 

•  Analysis of activities co-funded by ESF, their design and their effects on ESL 

EN 

38 

   EN 

8. 

ANNEXES 

Annex 1 – Description of a policy framework against early school leaving 

Annex 2 – Summary of the results of public consultations 

Annex 3 – Minutes of the Cluster Meeting 'Access and Social Inclusion', 17 May 2010  

Annex 4 – Minutes of the Stakeholder Platform Meeting, 14 June 2010 and list of participants 

EN 

39 

   EN 

8.1. 

Annex 1 – Description of a policy framework against ESL 

A framework for comprehensive policies against early school leaving 

Strategies to combat early school leaving should be based on an analysis at national, regional 
and local level of the conditions leading to the phenomenon, as average rates often mask large 
differences between different regions or countries. Early school leavers  are a heterogeneous 
group  and  individual  motivations  to  leave  education  prematurely  differ  widely.  Family 
background  and  wider  socio-economic  conditions  such  as  pull  from  the  labour  market  are 
important factors. Their impact is conditioned by the structure of the education and training 
system,  by  available  learning  opportunities,  and  by  the  learning  environment.  Coordinating 
policies  addressing  the  well-being  of  children  and  young  people,  social  security,  youth 
employment  and  future  career  perspectives  play  an  important  role  in  ensuring  upper 
secondary completion among young people.  

Identification of main factors and monitoring  

The  development  of  evidence-based  policies  to  combat  early  school  leaving  requires 
gathering  and  maintaining  data  on  the  phenomenon.  This  should  allow  analysis  at  local, 
regional  and  national  levels.  It  may  contain  information  on  early  school  leaving  rates,  on 
transitions between educational levels, as well as on school absenteeism and school avoiding 
behaviour.  

•  Data  collection  should  allow  for  the  identification  of  groups  of  pupils,  schools, 

municipalities or regions which are especially prone to early school leaving.  

•  The combination of data on early school leaving and socio-economic data can help in the 
targeting of measures and policies. Gathering and analysing information on the motivation 
of  early  school  leavers,  their  employment  and  career  perspectives  can  also  help  in  the 
targeting of measures and policies.  

•  Longitudinal research into the effectiveness and efficiency of policy reforms from the point 
of  reducing  ESL  allows  for  improving  strategies  and  programmes  for  increasing  pupils' 
chances of school success. 

Policy framework 

Comprehensive  strategies  comprise  a  mix  of  policies,  coordination  across  different  policy 
sectors and the integration of measures supporting the reduction of early school leaving in all 
relevant policies aimed at children and young people. This concerns mainly social policy and 
support  services,  employment,  youth  and  integration  policies.  Horizontal  coordination 
between  different  actors  and  vertical  coordination  across  level  of  governments  is  equally 
important.  Strategies  against  early  school  leaving  should  compose  prevention,  intervention 
and  compensation  elements.  Member  States  should  select  the  detailed  components  of  their 
strategies according to their own circumstances and context. 

•  Prevention addresses the risk of early school leaving before problems start. They optimise 
the provision of education and training in order to support better learning outcomes and to 
remove obstacles to educational success. 

EN 

40 

   EN 

•  They aim to strengthen the individual resilience of children, allowing them to cope better 

with difficulties, develop their learning potential and to integrate well in schools.  

•  Providing  high  quality  early  childhood  education  and  care  is  beneficial  for  all 
children  and  especially  relevant  for  those  from  disadvantaged  backgrounds, 
including  migrants  and  Roma.  It  enhances  physical  well-being,  social  and 
emotional development, language and basic cognitive skills. Provision should be 
high  quality,  affordable,  adequately  staffed  and  accessible  to  families  with  a 
disadvantaged background.  

•  They  address  at  system  level  the  organisation  of  education  and  training  systems,  the 
student  intake  and  the  resources  available  to  schools,  the  availability,  permeability  and 
flexibility of individual learning pathways. 

•  Developing  schools  and  training  institutions  into  learning  communities  and 
improving  the  quality  of  teaching  and  learning  can  enhance  the  motivation  of 
pupils to maintain education and training 

•  Increasing  the  educational  offer  by  prolonging  compulsory  education  or  by 
providing  education  and  training  guarantees  beyond  the  age  of  compulsory 
education  can  influence  the  behaviour  of  young  people  and  their  families  and 
support them better achieving a qualification or school leaving certificate. 

•  Implementing  active  desegregation  policies  and  providing  additional  support  for 
schools  in  disadvantaged  areas  or  with  high  numbers  of  pupils  from  socio-
economic  disadvantaged  backgrounds  helps  them  to  improve  their  social 
composition  and  their  educational  offer.  It  lifts  the  educational  achievements  of 
pupils from socio-economic disadvantaged backgrounds and reduces their risk of 
early school leaving. 

•  Supporting children with a different mother tongue to improve their proficiency in 
the  teaching  language  and  supporting  teachers  to  teach  children  with  different 
levels of linguistic competence supports especially the educational achievement of 
children with migrant background and reduces their risk of ESL. 

•  Increasing  the  flexibility  and  permeability  of  educational  pathways,  e.g.  by 
modularisation  of  courses  or  alternation  of  school  and  work,  supports  especially 
pupils  with  lower  academic  performance,  can  offer  them  credible  alternatives  to 
ESL  and  motivates  them  to  continue  education  and  training  which  is  adapted  to 
their needs and abilities. 

•  Strengthening  vocational  pathways  and  increasing  their  attractiveness  and 
flexibility provides pupils at risk with credible alternatives to early school leaving. 
VET  systems  which  are  well  integrated  into  the  overall  education  and  training 
systems allow for alternative pathways to secondary and tertiary education.  

•  Intervention aims to avoid early school leaving by improving the quality of education and 
training  at  the  level  of  the  educational  institutions  and  by  providing  targeted  support  to 
pupils  or  groups  of  pupils  at  risk  of  dropping  out.  They  address  all  educational  levels, 
starting from early childhood education and care to upper secondary education. 

EN 

41 

   EN 

•  At the level of the school or training institution strategies against early school leaving 
are embedded in an overall school development policy. They aiming at creating a positive 
learning  environment,  reinforce  pedagogical  quality  and  innovation,  enhancing  teaching 
staff  competences  to  deal  with  social  and  cultural  diversity,  and  to  develop  anti-violence 
and anti-bullying strategies 

•  Developing  early-warning  systems  for  pupils  at  risk  can  help  to  take  effective 
measures before problems become manifest, pupils start to alienate from school, 
play truant or drop-out. 

•  Enhancing  the  involvement  of  parents,  reinforcing  their  cooperation  with  the 
school  and  creating  partnerships  between  schools  and  parents  encourage  family 
support  for  successful  education  and  training.  It  can  be  facilitated  by  mediators 
from the local community who are able to support communication and to reduce 
distrust. 

•  Networking with out-side school actors such as local community services, migrant 
or minority community organisations, sports and culture associations, employers 
and civil society organisations allows for holistic solutions to help pupils at risk 
and  eases  the  access  to  external  support  such  as  psychologists,  social  and  youth 
workers, cultural and community services. 

•  Supporting  and  empowering  teachers  in  their  work  with  pupils  at  risk  is  a  pre-
requisite  to  successful  measures  at  school  level.  Targeted  teacher  training  helps 
them  to  deal  with  diversity  in  the  classroom,  to  support  pupils  from  socially 
disadvantaged backgrounds and to solve difficult teaching situations. 

•  Supporting extra-curricular activities after and out-side school can raise the self-
esteem of pupils at risk and increases their resilience against possible drawbacks 
and difficulties in their learning process. 

• 

Intervention  at  individual  level  aim  to  provide  a  set  of  support  mechanisms  for 
individual students at risk of dropping out which can be tailored to their needs. They focus 
both  on  personal  developments  in  order  to  build  resilience  for  students  at  risk  and  on 
redressing concrete difficulties, which can be of social, cognitive or emotional nature.  

•  Mentoring  and  tutoring  supports  individual  pupils  to  overcome  their  specific 
academic,  social  or  mental  difficulties.  Either 
in  one-to-one  approaches 
(mentoring) or in small groups (tutoring), pupils receive targeted assistance, often 
provided by education staff or by community members 

•  Strengthening  personalised  learning  approaches  and  providing  learning  support 
for pupils at risk helps them to adapt to the demands of formal education and to 
overcome barriers created by the education and training system. 

•  Strengthening  guidance  and  counselling  supports  students’  career  choices, 
transitions  within  education  or  from  education  to  employment;  it  avoids 
discontinuation  of  education  or  training  pathways  due  to  false  expectations  or 
insufficient information. It helps young people to make choices which meet their 
ambitions, personal interests and talents. 

EN 

42 

   EN 

•  Financial  support  measures  such  as  study  allowances  answer  to  financial 
difficulties of pupils and financially motivated early school leaving. Such support 
might be conditional to ensure regular attendance or might be linked to families' 
social benefits. 

•  Compensation  aims  to  help  those  who  left  education  and  training  prematurely,  offering 

routes to re-enter education and training and gain the qualifications they missed. 

•  Successful  second  chance  programmes  provide  learning  environments  which 
respond  to  the  specific  needs  of  their  learners,  looking  at  their  academic 
performance,  recognise  their  prior  learning  and  support  their  well-being  and 
psychological recovery. They distinguish from schools in both organisational and 
pedagogical  approaches  and  are  often  characterised  by  small  learning  groups, 
personalised  and  innovative  teaching  and  flexible  learning  pathways.  They  need 
to be easily accessible and free of charge. 

•  Offering  a  combined  set  of  measures  to  help  and  prepare  early  leavers  re-enter 
mainstream  education  and  training.  Appropriate  programmes  can  be  transition 
classes  bridging  the  gap  between  previous  school  failure  and  a  more  successful 
new start in mainstream education and training. In small learning groups outside 
the  school  buildings  pupils  can  regain  confidence  and  catch  up  on  missed 
learning. 

•  Recognising and validating prior learning including competences achieved in non-
formal and informal learning improves pupils' confidence and self-esteem. It can 
motivate them to continue education and training or to return to it.  

•  Targeted 

individual  support 

integrates  social,  financial,  educational  and 
psychological  support  for  young  people  in  difficulties.  It  is  especially  important 
for young people in situations of serious social, academic and emotional distress 
which hinders them from continuing education or training. 

EN 

43 

   EN 

8.2. 

Annex 2 – Summary of the results of public consultations 

The  consultation  on  'Schools  for  the  21st  century'  asked,  how  school  systems  could  best 
respond  to  the  need  to  promote  equity,  to  respond  to  cultural  diversity  and  to  reduce  early 
school leaving.  

Special  support  for  disadvantaged  students  was  most  often  mentioned  (117  respondents), 
followed by introducing more out-of school stages (64 respondents), providing early learning 
opportunities  (52  respondents),  adopting  a  comprehensive  anti-discrimination  policy  (50 
respondents),  and  providing  mentors  to  encourage  students  at  risk  of  leaving  education  and 
training early (47 respondents).  

4.a Anti-discrimination policy

4.b Provide mentors 

4.c Out-of-school stages

4.d Support for disadvantaged 

4.e  Representative of the population 

4.f Mix of different backgrounds

4.g Free choice of schools

EU Assoc

Authorities Nat Orgs

Schools etc

Students

Individuals

0

20

40

60

80

100 120 140

4.h Whole day schooling

4.i Specific second chance provision

4.j Early learning opportunities

4.k Selection of students 

4.l Repetition of  years

4.m Stream or set students 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

EU Assoc

Authorities Nat Orgs

Schools etc

Students

Individuals

Answers differed according to type of respondent. With regard to ESL, national, regional and 
local authorities stressed the importance of a 'remediation' system to reduce school drop-out, 
capable of intervening at an individual and family level as early as possible. Efforts should be 
focused  on  providing  personalised  learning  paths  for  the  most  vulnerable  throughout  their 
school career and transition to work, involving, for example, a multi-agency approach; upper 
secondary  school  reform  and  compulsory  national  progress  checks.  A  better  conjunction  of 

EN 

44 

   EN 

 
 
policy with school, family and young people is necessary, a policy that takes account of socio-
cultural diversity, valuing mother tongue but at the same time imposing the learning of one or 
two foreign languages. 

The  setting  up  of  individual  learning  routes  is  seen  by  schools  and  teachers  as  being  more 
likely  to  ensure  intrinsic  motivation  and  produce  less  drop-outs.  Both  organisational  and 
didactic reforms are seen as necessary to address the problems of ESL. There needs to be an 
emphasis on early years' education and early intervention for pupils with special needs – to 
reduce inequity and provide the best grounding for learning. 

The  consultation  on  migration  and  education  asked  for  the  important  policy  challenges 
related to the provision of good education to children from a migrant background.  

There  was  a  strong  consensus  across  all  types  of  contributors  that  the  crucial  challenge 
consists  of  breaking  the  link  between  socio-economic  disadvantage  and  educational 
disadvantage. Many contributors follow the analysis of the Green Paper in indicating that the 
lower  socio-economic  status  of  migrant  families  is  the  main,  but  not  only  reason  for  their 
educational disadvantage. ESL was also mentioned by respondents, but less often compared 
to questions such as segregation, teachers' skills to teach in multicultural classrooms and equal 
opportunities. ESL in the context of migration can be seen as one of the effects of the overall 
educational disadvantage of migrant children.  

Challenges identified

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Policy integration

Socio-economic status
Teachers' skills
Segregation

Equal opportunities 
Parents and communities
School adaptation
Heterogeneity

 Host language

Early school leaving
Resources

The  Council  Conclusions  on  the  same  subject,  adopted  in  November  2009,  contained  the 
following points 

EN 

45 

   EN 

 
EN 

46 

   EN 

 
8.3. 

Annex 3 - Minutes of the Cluster Meeting 'Access and Social Inclusion', 17 May 
2010  

Brussels, 

D(2010) 

11th Cluster Meeting "Access and Social Inclusion" 
Brussels, 17 May 2010 

PARTICIPANTS 

Minutes 

Petra Drahonovska (CZ), Josefa Salvador Hernandez (ES), Judit Szira (HU), Szilvia Pallaghy 
(HU), Donagh Kelly (IE), Diana Macri (IT), Claudio Frederico (IT), Ursula Armbruster (SE), 
Demet Goren Niron (TR), Keith Homes (ETF), Anne-Mari Nevala (GHK) 

DG EAC: Adam Pokorny, Gelu Calacean, Susanne Conze, Nora Milotay  

UP-DATE ON LATEST DEVELOPMENTS IN SCHOOL EDUCATION POLICIES AND THE 
NEW STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK (ET2020) 

(…) 

(…) 

PRESENTATION PLA REPORT TURKEY 

PRESENTATION OF PLANNED RECOMMENDATION ON EARLY SCHOOL LEAVING  

Adam Pokorny reported on current developments concerning the education targets in the new 
strategy Europe 2020. The strategy proposes that the share of early school leavers should be 
under  10%  and  at  least  40%  of  the  younger  generation  should  have  a  tertiary  degree.  The 
European Council agreed on most of the targets in EU 2020, but postponed the decision on 
the target on poverty reduction and the education targets. Education ministers recommended 
to the Council to adopt the education targets.52 

To  support  the  target  on  early  school  leaving,  the  European  Commission  is  preparing  a 
proposal for a Council Recommendation on policies against ESL. The Recommendation will 
outline  a  policy  framework;  it  will  be  accompanied  by  a  Commission  Staff  Working  Paper 
(SWP) which describes the different policies into more detail and provides a set of examples 
of  implementing  measures  in  different  Member  States.  The  cluster  members  had  received  a 
draft  version  of  the  SWP  prior  to  the  meeting.  They  were  asked  to  comment  on  the  paper; 
their comments would contribute to the impact assessment of the recommendation which was 
currently under preparation. 

52 

Education targets have been agreed by the Council on 17 June 2010. See 
http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/index_en.htm.  

EN 

47 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Susanne  Conze  presented  briefly  the  proposed  policy  framework,  underlining  the  main 
aspects  of  evidence-based  and  comprehensive  policies  against  ESL.  She  outlined  the 
measures proposed within the draft recommendation, subdivided into pre-emptive, preventive 
and compensatory measures. 

The following points were raised by participants during the discussion. They addressed both 
the draft Recommendation and the Staff Working Document. The following list of comments 
is organised in a thematic order: 

Societal factors leading to ESL 

•  The  situation  on  local  labour  markets  plays  an  important  role  at  system  level,  so  labour 

market policies have to contribute to the reduction of ESL. 

•  More attention should be paid to the diversity of the issue; a stronger focus should be on 
the social problems, poverty and housing problems which contribute to ESL. Schools will 
not  be  able  to  address  these  problems  on  their  own  (or  in  some  cases  not  at  all)  and 
solutions  based  on  educational  measures  only  will  not  be  sufficient  to  tackle  ESL 
effectively. Social aspects, family situations and school systems are among the causes of 
the problem of early school leaving and there is a need for holistic measures for tackling 
often unprecedented social problems in the context of the economic crisis.  

•  There  is  a  huge  diversity  in  Europe  and  countries  face  different  situation  with  regard  to 
ESL, have different problems and their policies create also different outcomes. This should 
be underlined within the paper. 

System level factors 

•  Monitoring and analysis of the situation is important, but there is not only a need to learn 
more about the early school leavers, but also about the systems, their structures and inbuilt 
obstacles. More dedicated research should address the effects of the systems. 

•  Transition  points  in  school  education  are  particularly  difficult  periods  for  children;  this 
should  be  highlighted.  As  an  example,  Sweden  introduced  pre-school  classes  to  ease 
transition from pre-primary to primary school. 

•  Besides ECEC, another pre-emptive measure could be the reduction or elimination of early 
class repetition, as research shows that it is a factor increasing significantly the risk of early 
school leaving. The age of school start and the availability of preparatory classes, making 
the  transition  from  ECEC  to  school,  should  also  be  more  emphasised,  as  there  is  often 
conflict  between  more  individualised  ECEC  pedagogy  and  the  more  uniform  school 
pedagogy. 

•  Measures against ESL need to be implemented in all schools; parallel systems in treatment 

of pupils need to be avoided. 

•  Early childhood education and care (ECEC) is an important tool to reduce school failure 
and  early  school  leaving,  but  does  not  cover  e.g.  newly  arriving  school-age  migrant 
children.  

EN 

48 

   EN 

•  PISA  showed  that  children  from  disadvantaged  backgrounds  are  more  likely  to  attend 
lower status (and often lower quality) schools; this contributes to the higher risk of drop-
out and early school leaving. 

•  Financial  support  to  families  is  very  important  and  should  be  emphasised  more, 
particularly financial aid for buying textbooks, as well as scholarships for poor children. 

•  The  rising  numbers  of  immigrant  pupils,  including  unaccompanied  minors,  were  singled 
out as factors for the increase in early school leaving. In this regard, there is a need for a 
culture  shift  in  curricula,  integrating  the  respect  of  diversity  as  a  major  objective  of 
education.  Increasing  the  diversity  of  the  teaching  workforce  could  also  have  positive 
effects for students from a migrant background. 

•  Children with migrant background are not automatically disadvantaged in school systems; 

the wording needs to be revised with regard to this aspect.  

School level factors 

•  At  school  level,  the  initial  and  continuous  education  of  teachers  plays  an  important  role. 
This could improve teachers' awareness of measures against ESL, their ability to recognise 
pupils at risk and to help them.  

•  Evaluation  and  inspection  systems  are  equally  important.  There  is  good  experience 
developed  in  Sweden  where  teacher  evaluation,  tutoring  and  monitoring  are  combined. 
School evaluations should be generalised to all schools and should also include leadership 
and  teacher  evaluations.  They  can  be  recognised  as  chances  to  receive  feed-back  and 
improve  own  work,  but  they  should  be  enforced  through  financial  sanctions  against 
schools which do not implement recommended measures.  

•  In addition to the role of teachers in reducing early school leaving, school leadership plays 
an  important  role  and  should  be  explicitly  mentioned.  Not  only  school  leaders,  but  also 
leaders of  pre-school should receive training  for pedagogical  and not only administrative 
leadership.  

•  Early warning systems in schools play a crucial role in schools; assessments for identifying 
early pupils lagging behind and for assessing individual progress can support such work. 
Often evaluations of students' performances start too late. 

•  The  effects  of  decentralisation  should  be  taken  more  into  account,  as  it  explains  many 
differences  in  quality  encountered  during  the  cluster's  work.  Inspection  regimes  should 
provide  evaluations  not  only  of  teachers  and  schools,  but  also  of  the  responsible  school 
authorities (usually local authorities).  

•  Formal and non-formal learning takes place inside and outside school. To mark better the 
difference between the different forms of learning, the term non-academic learning could 
be used to describe learning outside classrooms. There is also a need for close cooperation 
between  the  work  of  school  and  learning  provisions  outside  school  hours  and  more 
emphasis  should  be  put  on  their  integration  at  school  level.  Cooperation  between  after-
school and out-of-school pedagogues and class teachers is very important in this respect. 

EN 

49 

   EN 

Participants  also  made  detailed  comments  on  the  Staff  Working  Paper  accompanying  the 
Recommendation: 

•  They  emphasised  the  need  to  emphasise  more  issues  related  to  diversity  and  systemic 

issues in the analysis of the factors leading to early school leaving.  

•  References  to  research  on  de-segregation  programmes  in  HU,  BG,  and  TK  should  be 
included, as well as cost-benefit analyses from programmes in FI, NL, UK. There are more 
examples of countries with monitoring systems (e.g. HU).  

•  Participants  argued  that  the  section  on  ECEC  should  be  more  developed,  by  making 
references to provision in unitary settings, to preparatory classes for making the transition 
to school and to strengthening the curriculum of ECEC.  

•  Differences among schools within the same national system, as shown in the various PISA 

surveys should be particularly emphasised. 

•  The section on non-academic learning should be renamed – "integration of extracurricular 
activities" and should be further developed,  showing examples  of  mainstreaming  of  such 
activities 

•  The  section  on  guidance  should  also  be  more  developed.  The  independence  of  guidance 
and other support staff from school leadership should be emphasised, as a main factor for 
establishing relationships based on trust with children and youth at risk. 

•  The section on financial support, grants and scholarships should be also developed.  

•  The  section  on  compensatory  measures  should  emphasise  that  there  is  a  need  to  find  the 
right  length  of  transition  measures,  such  as  bridging  classes;  time  limitation  (bridging 
classes should not become permanent) and evaluations should be stressed in this context. 

•  Several  cluster  members  undertook  to  provide  additional  good  practice  examples  for  the 

Staff Working Paper on Early School Leaving. 

EN 

50 

   EN 

8.4. 

Annex 4 – Minutes of the Stakeholder Platform Meeting, 14 June 2010 and list 
of participants 

Brussels, 

EAC/B.2/SCO/mro Ares (2010) 476130 
SCHOOL_LEG_DOC.008 

Meeting School Education Stakeholder – Platform 
Brussels, 14 June 2010 

 Minutes 

Participating  organisations:  European  Network  of  Education  Councils  (EUNEC),  Stad 
Antwerpen, Fondation des Régions européennes pour la recherché end éducation et Formation 
(FREREF),  Network  of  Education  Policy  Centres  (NEPC),  European  Vocational  Training 
Association  (EVTA),  EUROCHILD,  International  Organisation  for  Migration  (IOM),  Open 
Society  Institute,  Platform  for  International  Cooperation  on  Undocumented  Migrants 
(PICUM),  Alliance  for  Childhood,  EUROCITIES,  Roma  Education  Fund,  European  Trade 
Union Committee for Education (ETUCE), Eurochambres, European Youth Forum. 

Excused: European Parents Association (EPA), European School Heads Association (ESHA), 
Assembly  of  European  Regions  (AER),  Standing  International  Conference  of  Inspectors 
(SICI),  European  Training  Foundation  (ETF),  European  Agency  for  Fundamental  Rights 
(FRA), Eurofound. 

European  Commission:  Adam  Pokorny  (B2),  Gelu  Calacean  (B2),  Susanne  Conze  (B2), 
Margarida Gameiro (A2), Angelos Agalianos (A2) 

WELCOME AND UP-DATE ON RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN SCHOOL EDUCATION POLICY 

Adam Pokorny welcomed the participants and underlined the three aims of the meeting: to re-
animate  the  stakeholder  forum  in  school  education,  to  up-date  participants  on  recent 
developments  in  school  education  policy  on  European  level  and  to  consult  them  on  the 
planned recommendation on policies against early school leaving. 

He  then  informed  participants  of  the  reorganisation  of  DG  EAC  which  took  effect  on  the  1 
June  2010.  One  of  the  results  of  this  reorganisation  was  the  creation  of  a  new  unit,  dealing 
with  equal  opportunities  and  equity  in  education.  The  profile  of  the  new  unit  was  briefly 
presented by Margarida Gameiro, Head of this new unit. 

In  his  presentation  on  recent  developments  in  school  education  policy,  Adam  Pokorny 
underlined  that  the  new  EU2020  strategy  leads  to  a  change  of  perspective  by  highlighting 
inclusive growth. Linked to that education and training receive more attention; the reduction 
of early school leaving rates to less then 10% has become a headline target. 

He mentioned major activities during the last years including 

•  Joint Progress Report 2009 focussing on key competences and competence based teaching 

(http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/doc1532_en.htm) 

EN 

51 

   EN 

 
•  Study  on  'Key  competences  in  Europe'  by  the  Centre  for  Social  and  Economic  Research 

CASE (http://ec.europa.eu/education/more-information/doc/keyreport_en.pdf) 

•  Thematic  Forum  on  School  Business  Cooperation 

in  March  2010 

in  Brussels 

(http://ec.europa.eu/education/school-education/doc2279_en.htm) 

•  Policy  Handbook  on  the  induction  of  new  teachers  (http://ec.europa.eu/education/school-

education/doc2254_en.htm) and new initiatives in the area of school leadership 

•  Two  new  actions  within  the  Comenius  Programme:  Comenius  Regio  Partnerships  and 
Comenius  Individual  Pupil  Mobility  (http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-
programme/doc84_en.htm) 

•  eTwinning, since 2007 part of the Comenius Programme, becoming more and more also a 

social network for teachers in Europe (http://www.etwinning.net/en/pub/index.htm) 

For the next months the following initiatives are planned:  

•  Publication on of a Policy Handbook the assessment of key competences 

•  A Proposal for a Council Recommendation on policies against Early School Leaving 

•  A Commission Communication on Early Childhood Education and Care 

•  New  Experts  Groups  within  the  Open  Method  of  Coordination  on  Key  Competences,  on 

Maths, Science and Technology and on Teacher Education 

•  The establishment of three policy  networks: Two of them will be launched via a call for 
proposals  in  summer  2010  (on  key  competences  in  school  education  and  on  policies 
concerning  school  leadership),  and  a  third  one  on  Migration  and  education  will  be 
launched in 2011. 

•  Several  studies  are  in  preparation  or  already  launched,  covering  following  topics: 
competence  requirements  of  staff  in  early  childhood  education  and  care,  ensuring  early 
acquisition  of  literacy:  study  on  parental  support,  educational  support  for  newly  arrived 
migrants, and policy measures to increase the attractiveness of the teaching profession. 

Susanne  Conze  briefly  presented  the  recently  adopted  Council  Conclusions  on  the  social 
dimension of education, covering all areas of education and training. The social dimension of 
education  was  also  discussed  on  a  conference  organised  by  the  European  Economic  and 
Social Committee in Florence in May 2010. It will be also subject of a conference organised 
under the Belgian presidency in Ghent on the 28/29 September 2010. 

Jana  Hainsworth  (Eurochild)  drew  the  attention  of  the  audience  to  another  conference 
organised under Belgian Presidency beginning of September addressing the fight against child 
poverty. 

RECOMMENDATION AND POLICY FRAMEWORK ON COMBATING EARLY SCHOOL LEAVING 

Susanne Conze presented the Policy Framework on combating Early School Leaving (ESL). 
Based  on  a  short  summary  of  the  main  reasons  for  ESL  and  its  effects  on  individual  and 
society,  she  outlined  the  components  of  an  evidence-based  and  comprehensive  policy 

EN 

52 

   EN 

approach  against  ESL.  The  policy  framework  has  been  described  in  detail  in  the  document 
send to participants prior to the meeting. 

There  was  general  agreement  on  the  policy  framework  as  such,  but  the  lively  debate 
underlined the following points which should be taken into consideration: 

Perspective of the individual child 

Participants  underlined  that  it  is  important  to  strengthen  the  individual  perspective  and  to 
focus  more  explicitly  on  the  situation  of  children  and  young  people  within  the  school 
education  system.  Children  have  rich  potentials,  competences  and  creativity,  they  have  the 
right to education and they have the right to be treated respectfully and corresponding to their 
needs.  The  role  of  education  and  schools  for  personal  development  of  children  and  young 
people  needs  to  be  underlined;  it  is  a  failure  of  the  school  education  system  not  to  support 
them sufficiently, but to "push them out". Measures against ESL also need to be embedded in 
a broader vision for schools. 

There is an overall tendency to stigmatise early leavers from education and training. It can be 
expected  that  some  young  people  will  always  leave  formal  education  and  training  system 
prematurely. Their behaviour can be seen as an indicator for the quality of the education and 
training  system  and  the  currently  high  levels  of  ESL  indicates  a  rather  insufficient  quality. 
Looking at those who dropped out can provide useful information on what has to be improved 
to prevent ESL. It is probably not realistic to eliminate ESL completely, but there is a need to 
learn from it and to improve education and training. 

Economic aspects of early school leaving  

While  several  participants  criticised  the  strong  economic  argumentation  in  the  document, 
other  supported  the  notion  that  economic  arguments  underline  well  the  urgency  of  the 
problem especially in times of economic and financial crisis. It was stated that the crisis forms 
a new dimension in European societies and is leading in practically all countries to severe cuts 
in  social  budgets.  Under  these  conditions,  it  has  to  be  made  clear  that  education  is  an 
investment, not a cost factor for states and societies, and the conditions for maximising this 
investment  have  to  be  investigated  further  on  the  basis  of  good  practice.  Economic  and 
financial crisis are usually followed by a social crisis and the current measures have to take 
this  into  account.  The  EU  has  an  interested  in  being  interesting  for  skilled  workers  and  it 
needs a holistic and welcoming approach in attracting them. 

Policies  against  ESL  need  further  investments  and  effective  measures  against  ESL  are  not 
self-financing.  But  it  is  important  to  analyse  in  which  way  the  available  resources  could  be 
used best.  

The  Commission  underlined  that  the  document  has  to  find  the  right  balance  between 
economic arguments and the vision of the child, their rights and perspective on education, but 
agreed that the focus on the individual needs to be strengthened 

Lack of data and information 

Participants  agreed  to  the  statement  within  the  document  that  there  is  a  lack  of  data  and 
knowledge  on  ESL.  The  identification  and  analysis  of  the  problems  leading  to  ESL  is  a 
crucial first step. It is necessary to get a clear overview of data and to have clear definitions 
when talking about ESL. Monitoring of the phenomenon is key. 

EN 

53 

   EN 

It  was  also  mentioned  that  low  ESL  rates  are  not  necessarily  a  sign  of  good  practices  in 
education.  The low national rates can hide the fact that  specific groups in  society are  much 
more  affected  by  ESL.  As  an  example  the  situation  of  Roma  children  in  Eastern  Europe 
countries was mentioned.  

Doubts were also raised concerning the quality of data on ESL. Bigger cities noticed a gap of 
several percent of data on their pupil population. This might question the reliability of the data 
used on European level.  

Interviews  with  teachers  and  pupils  can  contribute  enormously  to  our  knowledge  base  on 
ESL. 

Early childhood education and care (ECEC) 

Looking at the experience of teachers, but also with regard to research evidence, it should be 
underlined that policies to reduce ESL have to start as early as possible. There needs to be an 
even stronger focus on early childhood education and care. Often parents or families are not 
able to support their children sufficiently and these children face severe difficulties later on. 
Early  support  is  therefore  of  utmost  importance  and  a  more  detailed  description  of  quality 
criteria for effective services in ECEC, measures to prepare children for school and parental 
support programmes would enrich the document. 

EC agreed to extend the ECEC section in the paper. 

School-based measures 

Several  statements  raised  the  question  of  the  role  and  responsibility  of  schools  in  reducing 
ESL. They form an important link between measure taken with regard to the whole education 
and  training  system  and  the  way  in  which  individual  pupils  can  benefit  from  them.  This 
concerns pedagogical aspects, cooperation with parents as well as concrete support measures. 

One  point  in  this  context  is  the  role  of  the  school  climate  and  the  problem  of  violence  and 
bullying  at  schools.  It  would  be  also  interesting  to  look  at  school  councils  and  their  role  in 
involving  all  relevant  parties  in  school  development.  Here  also  the  own  perspective  of 
children on their well being should also be taken into account. There is a strong link between 
well-being  at  school  and  drop-out.  Desegregation  policy  should  also  be  mentioned  as  a 
school-wide measure. 

Personalised learning should be for all pupils, not only for those at risk of dropping out. There 
is a need to strengthen participatory pedagogy in order to build social competences and social 
capital. 

Schools  lack  financial  resources.  But  there  are  measures  which  do  not  necessarily  need 
additional  financial  support  such  as  peer-support-systems  and  peer-monitoring.  In  general  it 
was also underlined that there is a lack of cooperation between schools and families and with 
the local community. 

And schools should inform pupils on their possibility to continue learning and second chance 
options should be known to pupils.  

Although  not  directly  related  to  school-based  measures  it  could  be  interesting  to  look  more 
closely  at  private  tutoring.  It  can  be  assumed  that  private  tutoring  increases  the  problem  of 

EN 

54 

   EN 

ESL  and  school  failure  as  'standard'  school  education  risks  not  to  guarantee  anymore 
sufficient education levels. 

Mainstreaming and link to other policies 

One participant raised the concern that policy-makers could try to solve the problem of ESL 
with a 'quick fix'. Instead a system change is needed. ESL is a complex problem; it is also a 
social problem and measures against ESL need to be mainstreamed in all social policies.  

One  example  raised  during  the  discussion  was  that  a  school  optimisation  process  in  one 
Member State led to the closing of local schools. This measure was not linked with measures 
to prevent drop-out and in fact it increased drop-out. 

Local level involvement 

Several  participants  underlined  that  the  local  level  plays  an  important  role  in  reducing  ESL 
and should be underlined in a comprehensive strategy against ESL. Especially large cities or 
more  densely  populated  areas  are  facing  considerable  social  problems  and  need  a  holistic 
approach in addressing ESL. But they can also implement this approach by bringing different 
sources of funding together.  In times of budget  cuts, the local level also plays an important 
role in mobilising additional forces against ESL.  

At the same time it should be taken into account that not all stakeholders (the city, pupils and 
parents) have necessarily the same interests. There is also some tension concerning the role of 
schools. 

From  the  local  perspective,  the  proposed  policy  framework  addresses  the  right  points  and 
provides useful practical recommendations.  

Citizenship and education failure 

In  addition  to  the  negative  social  and  economic  effects  of  ESL  it  should  be  mentioned  that 
high  rates  of  ESL  constitute  a  risk  for  our  democracies  as  a  lack  educational  and  social 
'capital' leads also to political disadvantage and reduced participation in democratic processes. 

Transition from school to vocational training and work 

Transition  points  within  school  education  careers  and  from  school  to  vocational  training  or 
work are critical periods and ESL occurs more often at these points. More permeability within 
the education and training system is needed to ease transition and allow also for non-typical 
pathways.  

It  was  mentioned  that  vocational  training  can  function  as  a  compensatory  measure  against 
ESL and the role of work as a general tool for learning should be underlined. There are good 
practice  examples  on  transition.  At  the  same  time  it  is  necessary  to  look  at  youth 
unemployment.  VET  is  not  always  a  solution  for  early  leavers  and  though  it  is  often 
mentioned, it cannot solve the problem completely.  

Involvement of parents and families 

There is a tendency that teachers contact parents too late. But more engagement of families is 
needed  to  support  the  education  of  their  offspring  and  schools  should  motivate  families  to 

EN 

55 

   EN 

fulfil  this  supportive  role.  What  also  has  to  be  taken  into  account  is  that  nowadays  the 
influence of peers on a child's development is often stronger than the influence of the family 
or the school. 

Migration and Roma 

Children  of  irregular  and  undocumented  migrants  often  do  not  have  the  chance  to  attend 
school. Although it might not be possible to address this point in the paper, it should be kept 
in mind. Roma children are still faced with obstacles to continue education; changes in this 
have not yet been sufficient.  

Conditional cash transfer 

Several participants mentioned the possibility of conditional cash transfer to reduce ESL. E.g. 
in Brazil the state provides financial incentives for families to send their children to school. 
There  are  positive  experiences  with  conditional  cash  transfers  also  in  Hungary  and  the 
examples  on  this  approach  should  be  extended.  But,  one  participant  also  remarked  that  the 
impact of conditional cash transfer should be carefully evaluated as it can also have negative 
and stigmatising effects. 

Recognition of learning outcomes and flexibility of pathways 

Participants supported largely the recognition of learning outcomes and the call for flexibility 
of  learning  pathways.  Non-formal  learning  plays  an  important  role  in  increasing  the 
attractiveness of learning and motivating young people. Also the relevance of the curriculum 
is an important issue. 

Good practice examples 

It was recommended to add more good practice examples in the document. But an imbalance 
was noticed  by  pointing out  that there are only few examples from countries with low ESL 
rates.  This  could  be  due  to  a  lack  of  knowledge  of  their  policies  or  to  a  lack  of  targeted 
measures  against  ESL.  It  was  remarked  that  one  example  from  the  Netherlands,  'The  care 
advisory team', is not mentioned in the right place. 

MIGRATION AND EDUCATION 

Gelu  Calacean  presented  recent  developments  in  the  thematic  area  of  migration  and 
education.  He  drew  participants’  attention  to  the  Council  Conclusions  on  education  and 
migration, adopted in November 2009. Two major issues are under examination: the question 
of language support and the question how to prevent segregation. 

He announced the future plans in this area. The EC will launch a study on measures to support 
newly arriving migrant children and a policy network on migration and education in order to 
facilitate  the  exchange  among  Member  States.  The  Progress  Report  2010  will  include 
information on the future system to monitor the performance gap between migrant and native 
youth. 

Adam  Pokorny  informed  on  the  current  discussion  about  the  directive  77/486/EEC  on  the 
education of migrant workers and indicated that the Commission would decide on any future 
action in this respect in due course. 

EN 

56 

   EN 

During the discussion the following points were mentioned: 

It was highlighted that the reason why children with migrant background are strongly affected 
by early school leaving perform is rather due to their socio-economic family background than 
to their status as migrants.  

The distinction between migrants from EU countries and from non EU countries is not helpful 
for  the  effective  development  of  policies  for  migrants.  A  distinction  should  be  rather  made 
between newly arriving migrants and second generation migrants and their specific situation. 
Migrant children should be seen as a wealth of creativity and competences. The way we view 
and address migrant children has to be changed. 

A lack of data in this area was identified. It was also asked if there are indicators available 
concerning  migration  and  active  citizenship.  There  is  a  lack  of  political  involvement  of 
migrants  and  they  are  politically  not  sufficiently  empowered.  The  Commission  replied  that 
the monitoring  of the  situation  of migrant children in education has to be based on existing 
data and that limits its scope. MS would not agree to additional data collection burdens. The 
Commission will check which data could be used in this area. 

The legal status of migrants is relevant and irregular migrants are often deprived of education. 
This has negative long-term effects, especially once their presence in the country is legalised 
and  a  lack  of  previous  education  provision  becomes  an  urgent  problem  for  the  education 
system.  A  study  in  9  EU  Member  States  showed  that  children  of  undocumented  migrants 
often cannot access school education. This is not necessarily due to a legal problem or barrier, 
but  result  of  discriminatory  practices  and  practical  barriers.  Schools  are  asked  in  some 
countries to report the legal status of their pupils and therefore parents are afraid to send their 
children to school and to risk detection. Other schools fear not to receive funding for children 
from undocumented migrants and refuse registration. It is often also a wrong interpretation of 
the law. ECEC is especially difficult for them to attend. 

One participant identified three types of gaps: in achievement (linked to the educational level 
of parents), in participation of parents in school education (linked to the phenomenon of the 
'Mother  Mafia',  white  mothers  discriminating  against  migrant  mothers)  and  the  expectation 
gap (leading to wrong advice on school careers and underachievement of migrant children). 
Schools need to be open to an increasingly diverse society.  

Tracking  (early  selection  between  school  types)  was  seen  as  one  of  the  main  causes  for 
segregation.  Other  participants  confirmed  that  anti-discriminatory  education,  diversity 
management, parental education, measures of positive discrimination, teacher training and the 
responsibility  of  the  whole  society  is  needed  to  improve  the  situation.  Peer  support  from 
native children for undocumented migrants is important and there have been very successful 
examples in Europe, giving migrants moral support. The network 'Education without borders' 
is one other good example of this work. 

It was concluded that another Stakeholder Platform meeting should be organised next spring. 

EN 

57 

   EN 

Participants list 

Title  Surname  Name 

Institution 

Acronym

Mr 

Simone 

BARTHEL 

European Network of Education Councils 

EUNEC 

Ms 

Koen 

BASTIAENS 

Stad Antwerpen/Actieve City/General 
Education Policy 

Mr 

Joël 

BONAMY 

Fondation des Régions européennes pour la 
recherche en Education et Formation 

FREFEF 

Mr 

Clive 

BYRNE 

National Association of Principals and Deputy 
Principals 

ESHA 

Ms   Mia 

DOUTERLUNGNE European Network of Education Councils 

EUNEC 

Mr 

Ton 

DUIF 

AVS 

AVS 

Ms  Goele 

GEERAERT 

Stad Antwerpen/Werk en Economie 

Mr 

Maria 

GOLUBEVA 

Network of Education Policy Centers 

NEPC 

Ms  

Tommaso  GRIMALDI 

European Vocational Training Association 

EVTA 

Ms 

Jana 

HAINSWORTH  

Eurochild 

Ms 

Bern 

HEMINGWAY 

International Organisation for Migration 

IOM 

Mr   Roos 

HERPELINK 

European Network of Education Councils 

EUNEC 

Ms 

Jana 

HUTTOVA 

Open Society Institute 

Ms  Michèle 

LEVOY 

Platform for International Cooperation on 
Undocumented Migrants 

Ms  Michiel  

MATTHES 

Alliance for Childhood - European Network 

OSI 

PICUM 

Mr 

Paulo 

MOEKOTTE 

Eurocities 

Ms 

Beata 

OLAHOVA 

Roma Education Fund 

Mr 

Martin 

ROMER 

European Trade Union Committee for 
Education 

ETUCE 

Mr 

Margarete  RUDZKI 

Eurochambres 

Ms 

Luca 

SCARPIELLO 

European Youth Forum 

Ms 

Viviana  

Galli 

Organising Bureau of European School Student 
Unions 

OBESSU 

Ms  Milica  

BOJIC 

Organising Bureau of European School Student 
Unions 

OBESSU 

Ms 

Henriette 

JUR 

Organising Bureau of European School Student 
Unions 

OBESSU 

EN 

58 

   EN 

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
EN 

59 

   EN