Assessment of the implementation of the 2011 Council Recommendation on policies to reduce early school leaving : executive summary.
Date: 2019-09-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, comparative education, dropout, education policy, recommendation (EU), research report

Assessment of the Implementation of the 
2011 Council Recommendation on Policies 
to Reduce Early School Leaving (ESL):
Executive Summary

education and 
training

Download the full study

To download the full study, please visit:

http://publications.europa.eu/publication/manifestation_identifier/
PUB_NC0419473ENN

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu). 

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2019

PDF ISBN 978-92-76-11112-2 doi 10.2766/446517  catalogue NC-03-19-697-EN-N

© European Union, 2019
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

3

Assessment of the Implementation of the 2011 
Council Recommendation on Policies to Reduce Early 
School Leaving (ESL): Executive Summary

This  study  analyses  the  development  of  policies  and  practice  on  reducing  early  school  leaving  (ESL)  after  2011, 
seeking to assess the contribution of the 2011 Council Recommendation on Policies to Reduce Early School Leaving1 
and associated EU policy instruments to the development of policy, practice and research on ESL across Europe. 
Conducted seven years after the publication of the 2011 Recommendation, this comparative study looks back on 
achievements to date, with a view to informing strategic thinking for future policy development.

The study, conducted by Ecorys between December 2017 and July 2019, covers 37 countries: the 28 EU Member 
States,  five  Candidate  countries  (Albania,  Montenegro,  North  Macedonia,  Serbia,  Turkey)  and  four  EFTA  countries 
(Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland). The research included the mapping of ESL policies and practices in all 
countries, national and EU level stakeholder interviews and ten case studies (Austria, Bulgaria, France, Ireland, Latvia, 
Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain (Catalonia) and Sweden). 

The study has shown that there is largely positive overall picture regarding the impact and influence of the 2011 
Recommendation and associated EU policy instruments. The Recommendation and associated tools clearly shone a 
spotlight on the need to tackle ESL across Europe, as well as providing a policy framework for doing so, which countries 
and  key  stakeholders  have  globally  responded  to,  albeit  to  different  degrees  and  in  differing  manners.  Although 
disentangling the formal and informal pathways of influence into national policy remains a complex endeavour, the 
study has brought to light a range of national strategies and policies on ESL, as well as EU-funded projects and 
research, which either directly or broadly mirror the policy framework in the Recommendation. 

Nonetheless, the analysis of the evidence also clearly shows that much more needs to be done to continue tackling 
the multi-faceted and evolving range of challenges contributing to the ESL phenomenon. Although the ESL rate has 
steadily decreased overall in the EU over past years, it was still on average 10.6% in 2018 and has stagnated over 
recent years. Considerable differences also exist across countries and for specific population groups (e.g. migrants, 
young men, people in rural areas). Despite a decrease in ESL rates in most EU Member States in 2011-2018, the 
ESL rate has actually increased in eight Member States. By 2018, 13 Member States had not reached their specific 
2020 national targets for ESL.

While recognising the important influence of the 2011 Recommendation and tools, the study therefore also highlights 
gaps and weaknesses, on which we have drawn to formulate recommendations. 

1 Council of the European Union, Council recommendation of 28 June 2011 on policies to reduce early school leaving, 2011/C 

191/01, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2011:191:0001:0006:en:PDF 

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 2011 COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION  ON POLICIES TO REDUCE EARLY SCHOOL LEAVING (ESL): EXECUTIVE SUMMARY4

Evidence of the influence of the 2011 Recommendation in policy measures 

The research shows that the interplay of a number of complex factors related to the individual situation of each student 
contributes  to  the  likelihood  of  early  school  leaving;  these  include  individual  factors,  socio-economic  background, 
school-based  factors,  and  national  contextual  factors.  In  order  to  tackle  the  full  range  of  issues  contributing  to 
ESL, the 2011 Recommendation recommends the implementation of comprehensive strategies, comprising policy 
measures  under  three  pillars:  prevention,  intervention  and  compensation.  The  study  examines  the  prevalence  of 
different policy measures under each of the pillars:

 y The analysis shows that compensation measures are comparatively well-established across Europe. Most EU 
countries offer ‘second chance’ education schemes of some description, often combined with career guidance, 
financial, childcare and/or psychological support. 

 y Country coverage of intervention policies is also relatively widespread, although with more variation. Coverage 
is  highest  for  intervention  measures  focused  on  in-school  support,  including  targeted  support  for  learners 
experiencing  personal,  social  or  academic  difficulties,  as  well  as  continuing  professional  development  for 
teachers  and  school  leaders  to  manage  diversity.  Implementation  of  infrastructural  measures  shows  the 
weakest overall coverage, including for example measures relating to school networks, early warning systems, 
and extra-curricular provision.

 y Although  country  coverage  of  prevention  policies  is  also  fair  overall,  most  countries  have  some  gaps,  and 
around a quarter have more marked gaps. As for intervention measures, implementation of systemic policies 
(e.g.  anti-segregation  policies)  appears  less  prevalent  than  measures  implemented  within  schools  or  other 
institutions  (e.g.  improving  accessibility  of  early  childhood  education  and  care  to  all,  developing  curriculum 
flexibility and choice).

 y For all pillars, the coverage of measures in non-EU countries is markedly weaker.

The most direct link to influence of the Recommendation on national policy can be identified where countries have 
implemented – or adapted - a national strategy directly targeted at tackling ESL since 2011. This is the case in 
eight  Member  States/education  systems  (Austria,  the  Flemish  Community  of  Belgium,  Bulgaria,  France,  Greece, 
Hungary,  Malta,  Romania),  while  an  equivalent  strategy  in  the  Netherlands  pre-dates  2011.  A  further  group  of 
countries  (Cyprus,  Finland,  Ireland,  Italy,  Latvia,  Lithuania,  Luxembourg,  Norway,  Portugal,  Serbia,  Spain,  Sweden, 
Slovakia, Turkey) has not implemented an overarching ESL strategy, but has implemented different measures which 
clearly correspond to the EU policy framework either as individual policies or within the context of other educational 
strategies. The Recommendation has had a more limited influence in other countries examined in the study (Albania, 
Croatia, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Slovenia, 
Switzerland, United Kingdom). In many of those countries, this is principally either due to having historically relatively 
low ESL rates, or long-standing ESL frameworks or policy measures in place before 2011. 

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 2011 COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION  ON POLICIES TO REDUCE EARLY SCHOOL LEAVING (ESL): EXECUTIVE SUMMARY5

Factors influencing the implementation of the 2011 Recommendation 

The  study  shows  that  various  factors  have  influenced  efforts  to  put  the  2011  Recommendation  into  action  at  a 
country level. These include both structural and implementation factors, as summarised in the figure below:

Factors affecting the effectiveness  
of ESL national strategy implementation

Structural  factors  include:  political  leadership  and  stability;  labour  market  policies;  socio-demographic  factors, 
migration and population change; the legal framework for compulsory education; governance arrangements within 
education systems; equity and inclusion policies; quality and availability of early childhood education and care; and, 
quality of teaching and continuing professional development programmes. The study showed that many countries 
were  facing  an  adverse  set  of  structural  challenges  at  the  time  of  the  2011  Recommendation,  creating  difficult 
conditions for policy innovation.

Implementation factors include the existence of: a comprehensive ESL strategy; a national coordinating mechanism 
or structure; a corresponding set of policy measures - prevention, intervention and compensation; an implementation 
plan, with clear targets and milestones; proportionate resources for implementation; synergies with other EU and 
national  funding;  clear  vertical  and  horizontal  lines  of  accountability;  and,  systematic  monitoring,  evaluation  and 
feedback. Two of the most significant challenges included a lack of policy coherence, as well as insufficient monitoring 
and evaluation.

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 2011 COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION  ON POLICIES TO REDUCE EARLY SCHOOL LEAVING (ESL): EXECUTIVE SUMMARY6

Effectiveness of the EU policy tools supporting the 2011 Recommendation 

The study also examines the relevance, effectiveness and sustainability of the tools developed by the Commission 
to support the implementation of the 2011 Recommendation. 

In terms of EU monitoring and reporting mechanisms, it was clear that the setting and monitoring of a headline 
target for ESL was widely considered to be an effective tool, in particular for raising the profile and visibility of 
ESL at national level. The European Semester reports and country-specific recommendations have also often 
carried weight with national policymakers and provided challenge where efforts had stalled, as well as validating 
progress. Nevertheless, the desk research and interviews showed the importance of understanding the drivers 
of change in ESL within European countries, including variations in ESL rates at a municipal level, and among 
different sub-populations.

Targeted  funding  mechanisms  (e.g.  the  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds    and  their  ex-ante 
conditionalities, Erasmus+) also appear to have played a valuable role in supporting national level implementation. 
There was considerable evidence that the ex ante conditionalities played an important part in levering action 
at a national level, although challenges were raised in some cases around sustained engagement. EU-funded 
programmes have also been widely utilised to address national ESL priorities; in the most impactful examples, 
ESF  has  been  utilised  to  support  strategic  projects  with  a  close  alignment  to  the  2011  Recommendation. 
However,  the  separation  of  EU  programmes  from  national  policy-making  and  budgets  was  highlighted  as  a 
challenge in some countries, as well as the risk of substitution effects, and limitations posed by having too many 
disparate projects.

The effectiveness of the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) in terms of supporting ESL policy implementation 
was more mixed. Although the OMC Working Groups in 2011-20152 directly influenced the Council Conclusions 
on ESL in 2015 and the ET 2020 Working Groups were recognised to be a valuable forum for dialogue between 
national stakeholders and the European Commission, their value was principally thought to reside in providing 
access to good practice examples. The greatest benefits were often reported from smaller scale and more direct 
exchanges  between  country  representatives,  e.g.  peer  learning  activities.  The  written  outputs  from  the  OMC 
were generally well regarded; in particular, the evidence indicates that the European Toolkit for Schools3 offers 
a high quality set of resources, with the EC School Education Gateway web analytics demonstrating that the 
Toolkit has achieved a good level of visibility, especially the Stakeholders Engagement page. 

Influence of the 2011 Recommendation on research

ESL is a somewhat neglected research area internationally by comparison with many other areas of education. 
Within  this  context,  our  study  concluded  that  the  2011  Recommendation  and  tools  have  –  to  some  degree 
– played a compensatory role for the neglect of ESL at university level, mainly through EU-funded research
projects broadly associated with the ESL theme.

2 ESL Thematic Working Group (2011-2013) and ET 2020 Schools Working Group (2014-2015)
3 https://www.schooleducationgateway.eu/en/pub/resources/toolkitsforschools.htm

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 2011 COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION  ON POLICIES TO REDUCE EARLY SCHOOL LEAVING (ESL): EXECUTIVE SUMMARY7

Relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability 

Overall,  the  study  findings  provide  a  strong  indication  that  the  2011  Recommendation  is  regarded  as  relevant  and 
effective across Europe, especially within the EU28, but also to a varying degree among Candidate and EFTA countries. 
It provides a key policy focus that synthesises a range of policy concerns as regards social inclusion, employment, active 
citizenship, peace and stability. The Recommendation has interacted in complex ways with national and EU policies and 
programmes, including those in the fields of youth, labour markets, and lifelong learning; nonetheless, its ‘footprint’ can 
be traced in educational strategies and policies initiated across Europe during the period from 2011-2018. 

The accompanying suite of EU policy tools have procured complementary effects and supported the sustainability of 
policy attention and efforts in tackling ESL, through the provision of opportunities via the OMC and targeted funding 
for structured dialogue, funding actions and research, disseminating research and good practice examples. 

The evidence for the efficiency of the 2011 Recommendation and policy tools is rather mixed and complex to ascertain 
with any strong degree of certainty. As budgets for ESL were usually neither ring-fenced nor extensively monitored, 
the causal chains between financial inputs, activities, outputs and results are weakly defined.

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 2011 COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION  ON POLICIES TO REDUCE EARLY SCHOOL LEAVING (ESL): EXECUTIVE SUMMARY8

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 2011 COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION  
ON POLICIES TO REDUCE EARLY SCHOOL LEAVING (ESL): EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Recommendations

Drawing on the findings, the study sets out  
a number of recommendations.

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 2011 COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION  
ON POLICIES TO REDUCE EARLY SCHOOL LEAVING (ESL): EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

9

Recommendations for EU level tools to tackle ESL

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

To keep the policy spotlight on tackling ESL, there is a need to renew and relaunch the 2011 Recommendation 
and associated policy tools, taking into account the policy learning from implementation and the contextual 
changes (e.g. migration crisis).

The headline target provides a valuable and visible cross-country comparative point, and should be retained 
post-ET 2020. As well as reviewing the level at which to set the future target, further consideration should
be given to the use that can be made of disaggregated data (e.g. on migration background or gender).

Translational  tools,  e.g.  a  grid  of  structural  indicators,  have  the  potential  to  synthesise  key  policy
recommendations and minimise policy amnesia, ensuring that Member States are required to report on
why different types of measures are not being implemented.

Continue the inclusion of specific country specific recommendations  on ESL in the European Semester;
further scaffolding should however be provided not only to say what should be done, but how to achieve it,
with clear signposting to different mechanisms such as EU funding sources, peer counselling or targeted
peer learning.

Consider tougher standards to ensure that project activities funded by the European Social Fund, or other
EU funds (e.g. Erasmus+) are strategic and effectively targeted to address national priorities and needs, to
avoid the piecemeal approach that was found in many countries.

Ensure that the longstanding focus on educational inclusion is retained within the mandate of the ET 2020
Working Group on Schools, including an explicit focus on ESL.

Expand opportunities for peer counselling and peer review, to enable more focused country exchanges and
visits on ESL topics, perhaps linked to country-specific recommendations.

Undertake  further  communications  activities  to  raise  the  profile  of  the  European  Toolkit  for  Schools,
capitalising on the potential of the Toolkit to disseminate case studies and research in a format that is
accessible to educationalists across Europe.

Develop a new EU-level ESL Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, including standardised and evidence-
based research instruments for evaluating policies and programmes in the field of ESL, disseminated via
the European Toolkit for Schools.

10. Consider  setting-up  an  EU  Monitoring  and  Evaluation  Observatory  for  ESL,  bringing  together  higher
education  institutions  from  across  Europe  to  take  the  lead  in  high  quality  multi-disciplinary  academic
research in the field of ESL.

11. EU policy documents and tools on ESL should be better disseminated and communicated to all relevant
stakeholders including EU, national, regional and local policymakers, EU and national funding organisations
for  educational  measures,  the  research  community,  teacher  education  institutions,  non-governmental
organisations and social partners.

10

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 2011 COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION  
ON POLICIES TO REDUCE EARLY SCHOOL LEAVING (ESL): EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Recommendations for ESL policy and practice (at national and EU level)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Ensure that ESL strategies or measures include a sufficient focus on prevention and intervention, as well as
compensation. Tackling problems proactively before – or as soon as - warning signs appear avoids problems
escalating and complete disengagement from the education system, from which is much harder to return. All
learners can benefit from prevention policies, not only the groups most at risk of ESL.

Develop policies to address the specific needs of particular groups, such as learners of different age-groups,
young  men,  those  living  in  rural  or  deprived  areas.  There  also  needs  to  be  a  stronger  focus  on  those  with
complex needs (e.g. children with mental health issues, children in care, children with a parent in prison).

In  order  to  tackle  the  multi-faceted  dimensions  of  ESL,  facilitate  and  promote  more  strategic  and  cross-
sectoral  dialogue  between  policymakers  across  different  fields  (e.g.  education,  health,  employment,  justice,
migration)  both  at  national  level  (across  ministries)  and  at  EU  level  (across  Directorate-Generals  of  the
European Commission, but also involving other relevant players such as the EU social partners or EU level non-
governmental organisations).

To be effective, policy-making must include the voices of other key stakeholders such as marginalised parents,
learners, migrant communities and non-governmental organisations.

A whole community, area-based approach merits further consideration at policy, practitioner and research level,
including promising examples of community lifelong learning centres combined with multidisciplinary teams as
one stop shops. Policies aimed at tackling ESL should be further integrated with those targeting anti-bullying
as well as mental health and wellbeing, including trauma.

6. More – and more effective – systems need to be established to facilitate the successful integration of newly-
arrived migrants and refugees to avoid disproportionate ESL levels. There is an insufficient policy focus on the
validation/recognition of prior learning, which has a particular impact for migrants.

7.

8.

9.

There is considerable scope to better strategically exploit the potential of the arts and culture, as well as other
extra-curricular activities, to tackle ESL.

The  potential  of  ESL  measures  to  contribute  to  increased  peace,  stability,  and  social  cohesiveness  is  not
recognised clearly enough in policy processes or documents.

There is a clear agenda for the reform of initial teacher education to place ESL – and social inclusion more widely 
– at the heart of the preparation of teachers and other school leaders for the classroom. More focus should
also be placed on the dimensions of teaching which can influence ESL in continuing professional development,
including raising awareness of the phenomenon and spotting warning signs early.

10. ESL needs to become a more cohesive research community through fostering research networks building on

university connections.

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 2011 COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION  
ON POLICIES TO REDUCE EARLY SCHOOL LEAVING (ESL): EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

11

N
C
-
0
3
-
1
9
-
6
9
7
-
E
N
N

-

ISBN:  978-92-76-11112-2