Proposal for a Council recommendation on Pathways to School Success
Date: 2021-11-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, European Commission
Subjects: education policy

Proposal for a Council Recommendation on Pathways 
to School Success 

Summary of the public consultation activities 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table of Contents 

0.1. 

List of figures and tables ......................................................................................................... 2 

0.2. 

List of abbreviations ................................................................................................................ 2 

1. 

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................... 3 

1.1. 

Targeted consultation workshops .......................................................................................... 3 

1.2. 

Roadmap feedback ................................................................................................................. 4 

1.3.  Open public consultation ........................................................................................................ 4 

1.3.1. 

Online survey .................................................................................................................. 4 

1.3.2. 

Respondents’ country of origin ....................................................................................... 5 

1.3.3. 

Respondents’ profile ....................................................................................................... 6 

1.3.4. 

Position papers................................................................................................................ 8 

2. 

Summary of the consultation results .......................................................................................................................... 8 

2.1.  Obstacles and problems hindering school success ................................................................. 9 

2.2. 

Impact of the Covid-19 crisis ................................................................................................. 17 

2.3.  Measures to be prioritised and promoted in the new initiative .......................................... 21 

2.3.1. 

Priority measures at the system level ........................................................................... 21 

2.3.2. 

Priority measures at school level .................................................................................. 26 

2.4. 

Priority measures to promote well-being at school ............................................................. 30 

2.5. 

Additional recommended monitoring and prevention measures ........................................ 34 

2.6. 

Additional recommended intervention measures ................................................................ 38 

2.7. 

Additional recommended compensation measures ............................................................. 40 

2.8. 

Role of the EU in addressing identified obstacles and problems ......................................... 42 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
0.1. 

List of figures and tables 

Table 1: Overview of consultation activities and groups 

Figure 1: The top 10 countries per share of respondents 

Figure 2: Information on the profiles and composition of OPC respondents 

Table 2: Main obstacles to school success (per respondent category) 

Figure 3: Impact of the Corona crisis on the ability of the national education system to  provide 
quality education 

Table  3:  Specific  problems  caused  or  rendered  visible  by  the  Covid-19  crisis,  particularly  for 
vulnerable pupils 

Table 4: Measures to be prioritised at system level to help all children and young people succeed 
at school 

Table 5: Measures to be prioritised at school level to help all children and young people succeed 
at school 

Table 6: Factors contributing to a positive learning environment  

Table 7: Monitoring and prevention measures considered to be urgent 

Table 8: Specific intervention measures considered to be urgent 

Table 9: Compensation measures considered to be urgent 

Table 10: Share of respondents rating EU support measures to Member States as ‘important’ or 
‘very important’ (per respondent category) 

  3 

6 

7 

12 

18 

19 

21 

27 

31 

35 

39 

41 

43 

0.2. 

List of abbreviations 

ECEC 

Early childhood education and care 

ELET 

Early leaving from education and training 

LGBTI 

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and/or intersex 

OPC 

Open public consultation 

PSS 

Pathways to School Success 

STEM 

Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics 

VET 

Vocational Education and Training 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.  Introduction 

This summary report presents the main findings of the stakeholder consultation activities conducted in 
the  context  of  a  proposal  for  the  Council  Recommendation  on  Pathways  to  School  Success  (PSS).  The 
consultation  activities  on  the  PSS  initiative  included  two  main  strands,  namely  online  consultation 
workshops with representatives from Member States and organisations active in the field of education 
as well as an open public consultation (OPC) in the form of an online survey. 

Table 1 below provides an overview of the conducted consultation activities and the stakeholder groups 
involved: 

Table 1: Overview of consultation activities and groups 

Consultation type 

Stakeholders 

Activity 

Number of participants 

Roadmap 

Wider public in personal or 
organisational capacity 

First round of online 
workshops 

International and pan-
European stakeholder 
organisations, NGOs, 
Commission representatives 
(JRC, EACEA, CEDEFOP), 
Member States, educational 
projects, teachers 

Roadmap feedback 
7 May 2021 –  
4 June 2021 

Online workshop 
25 May 2021 

Online workshop 
2 June 2021 

Second round of online 
workshops 

Representatives from 
educational ministries in 
Member States 

Online workshop 
14 September 2021 

Online workshop  
16 September 2021 

Online survey 
24 June 2021 –  
30 September 2021 

Open public 
consultation 

Wider public in personal or 
organisational capacity 

1.1. 

Targeted consultation workshops 

8 written statements 
received 

26 participants 

(13 organisations, 2 repre-
sentatives from JRC, 8 
Member States, 2 projects, 1 
teacher) 

14 participants 

(9 organisations, 2 Member 
States, 1 participant from 
each: CEDEFOP, EACEA, 
an educational project) 

8 participants  

(representing 7 Member 
States) 

12 participants  

(representing 11 Member 
States) 

309 responses (and 28 
position papers received) 

In preparation for the Proposal for a Council recommendation on Pathways to School Success, four online 
reflection  workshops  were  held  between  the  end  of  May  and  mid-September  2021.  At  the  first  two 
workshops, participants focussed their discussions on the main policy measures that ought to be part of 
the  PSS  initiative  as  well  as  obstacles  preventing  these  from  being  implemented  by  Member  States. 
Possible  solutions  for  overcoming  such  obstacles  were  also  reflected  on  by  participants  that  included 
representatives from pan-European umbrella organisations, the Commission and Member States, among 
others. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
A  second  round  of  online  consultation  workshops  was  held  towards  the  end  of  the  stakeholder 
consultation  process.  During  two  workshops  in  mid-September,  representatives  from  educational 
ministries of Member States discussed the importance and relevance of specific measures that had been 
identified during preceding consultation activities. 

1.2. 

Roadmap feedback 

The Commission uses roadmaps to define the scope of major new laws or policies as well the evaluations 
of existing laws and policies. Eight written statements from various stakeholder types1 were received in 
May and June 2021 to the Commission’s roadmap to the PSS initiative. The main points and arguments 
in the written feedback are presented in chapter 2 alongside findings from the open public consultation 
outlined below. 

1.3. 

Open public consultation 

The  wider  public  was  able  to  express  its  views  and  positions  related  to  the  proposal  for  a  Council 
recommendation on PSS by participating in the Open Public Consultation (OPC) between 24 June and 30 
September 2021. Acting in either a personal or organisational capacity, citizens and other stakeholders 
had  the  opportunity  to  respond  to  an  online  survey  and/or  send  in  position  papers  containing  their 
comments to the planned proposal. The individual activities conducted for the OPC are described below. 

1.3.1. 

Online survey 

The online survey was launched on 24 June 2021 in all 24 official EU languages. In its entirety, the survey 
consists of 24 questions of which 11 (hereafter ‘the survey questions’) are related to subject matters 
addressed by the PSS initiative. The remaining 13 questions are of a factual/demographic nature. They 
partly serve the purpose of distinguishing between different respondent subgroups as well as allowing 
for the adaptation of the survey to two main target groups. Whilst the subsample ‘practitioners in the 
field of education and training or representing an organisation in the field of education and training’ were 
prompted to respond to all survey questions, three questions aimed at these stakeholders were skipped 
for the subsample ‘students/learners, parents or citizens interested in this topic’2. 

Overall, the online survey was structured into 7 sections: 

1. 

Introduction 

2.  General questions on factors hindering children and young people to succeed in school education 

3. 

Impact of the Covid-19 crisis on the ability of the school system to provide quality education 

4.  Recommendations for designing the PSS initiatives 

5.  Additional 

specific 

questions 

on 

recommended  measures 

(only 

for 

educational 

practitioners/organisations in the field of education) 

6.  Additional contributions (free text entry and possibility to submit a position paper) 

7.  Background information 

1 Roadmap feedback was received from (inter)national NGOs (3), trade unions (2), a pan-European umbrella organisation (1), one 
EU citizen, and one non-EU citizen. 
2  These  three  multiple-choice  questions  were  asking  stakeholders  to  identify  among  a  list  of  options  what  1)  monitoring  and 
prevention, 2) intervention, and 3) compensation measures should be given priority to ensure school success for all children and 
young people.  

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
The 11 survey questions  in sections 2-6 are  first and  foremost multiple choice close ended questions 
prompting respondents to select between 1 to 3 options among a list of possible answers. Most of the 
closed  questions  also  offer  the  possibility  of  a  free  text  entry,  allowing  for  respondents  to  share 
comments  and  answers  not  already  listed.  The  three  questions  exclusively  aimed  at  educational 
practitioners or organisations in the field of education were structured in the same manner. Two close 
ended  survey  questions  use  a  5-point  Likert  scale,  whilst  one  open  question  gives  respondents  the 
opportunity to provide additional comments. Furthermore, all respondents are invited to submit a position 
paper by uploading a document. 

Quantitative and qualitative methods were applied to analyse received survey responses. Close ended 
questions  were  analysed  with  the  help  of  descriptive  statistics  reporting  absolute  frequencies  or 
percentages. As eight multiple choice survey questions prompted respondents to select between 1 to 3 
options among a longer list of possible answers, the percentages do not add up to 100 % in these cases. 
Answers to the question using a five-point Likert scale are distributed across the five different categories 
defined in the question3. It must be pointed out that the gathered responses represent the views of those 
having  submitted  them.  Respondents  to  the  OPC  are  self-selecting  and  do  not  constitute  a  statistical 
sample of the EU population. 

Since the launch of the OPC was significantly delayed due to various reasons, the first seven weeks of 
data collection coincided to a great extent with school holidays across Europe. This had a direct impact 
on the survey response rate, which initially was quite low. During the first seven weeks of the OPC 105 
respondents completed the  survey, and 5 position papers were  submitted. However, the response rate 
increased in the last five weeks of data collection, meaning that a total of 309 replies and 25 position 
papers were received by the end of the OPC. 

1.3.2. 

Respondents’ country of origin 

A total of 309 responses to the OPC were received. Respondents are mostly from the EU-27 (97.1 %) and 
participation from non-EU countries was very limited4. When looking at respondents’ country of origin, 
there is a somewhat uneven distribution in the survey sample. More than two out of three respondents 
come from either Portugal (20 %), Spain (15 %), Italy (13 %), Romania (12 %), or Belgium (8 %). Other 
Member States are represented by less than 4 % (or in three cases not at all)5. Figure 1 below presents 
the ten most represented countries. 

3 The question relates to the impact of the Covid-19 crisis on the ability of the school system to provide quality education, using 
the categories ‘Negative impact’, ‘No impact’, ‘Both negative and positive impact’, ‘Positive impact’, and ‘I don’t know’. 
4 Norway (1.3 %); represented by less than 1 % each: Angola, Brazil, Colombia, Jordan, Pakistan, the Philippines, the United 
Kingdom. 
5 Lithuania, Luxembourg and Malta were not represented. 

5 

 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 1: The top 10 countries per share of respondents 

Top 10 countries per share of respondents

20%

15%

13%

12%

8%

Portugal
Spain
Italy
Romania
Belgium
Netherlands
Croatia
Greece
Germany
Czech Republic

n = 309

3%
3%
3%
3%
2%

Source: Open public consultation on the EEA initiative Pathways to School Success (2021) 

As stated in greater detail below, other respondent categories are similarly over-/underrepresented (e.g., 
in  terms  of  the  primary  occupation  of  respondents),  whilst  there  is  a  more  even  distribution  of 
respondents in regard to the educational level that they are linked to. 

1.3.3. 

Respondents’ profile 

A  vast  majority  of  the  309  OPC  respondents  (86 %)  stated  to  be  either  practitioners  in  the  field  of 
education  and  training  or  representatives  of  an  organisation  in  this  field.  Looking  at  the  primary 
profession or status of this subgroup, 50 % stated to be currently active as a teacher, trainer, or educator, 
followed by 8 % identifying as a leader or member of senior management of an education and/or training 
institution,  and  those  stating  to  be  researchers  (6 %)6.  In  contrast,  14 %  of  the  entire  survey  sample 
identified as ‘students/learners, parents or citizens interested in this topic’. 

In  total,  50.2 %  of  all  respondents  replied  to  the  consultation  in  a  personal  capacity,  whilst  38.2 % 
completed  the  OPC  survey  on  behalf  of  an  institution  or  organisation.  The  remaining  11.6 %  did  not 
specify in what capacity they were contributing, choosing the category ‘other’ instead. 

Regarding  to  what  extent  different  types  of  organisations  were  represented,  responses  from 
academic/research institutions were most frequent (16 %), followed by non-governmental organisations 
(NGOs)  (10 %),  public  authorities  (8 %),  and  trade  unions  (4 %).  The  participation  of  business 
organisations and associations was low (i.e., below 1 %). The pie charts presented in figure 1 below offer 
detailed information on the profiles and composition of OPC respondents.  

6 Represented to a lesser degree (i.e., below 5 %): Professional/administrator in education and training institutions (non-teaching) 
(5 %), welfare/ counsellor/ youth worker (2 %), policymaker (2 %), student/learner (all types in all sectors, including trainees and 
apprentices) (<1 %), ‘other’ / not defined (27 %); n=265  

6 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 2: Information on the profiles and composition of OPC respondents 

Source: Open public consultation on the EEA initiative Pathways to School Success (2021) 

Although the survey contains questions to identify further respondent subgroups, a meaningful analysis 
of differences in responses between these smaller samples is difficult. This has to do with the relatively 
small sample size and its composition. For example, out of the 265 respondents currently active in an 
education/training  sector,  more  than  half  (57 %)  are  affiliated  with  institutions  for  formal  education, 
whilst much smaller shares (10 % and less) are affiliated with other institutional types7. A similar picture 
arises  when  distributing  the  aforementioned  subgroup  in  terms  of  their  stated  profession  or  primary 
occupation.  With  50.2 %,  slightly  more  than  half  of  this  subgroup  consists  of  teachers,  trainers,  or 
educators at all educational levels, whilst other professions or primary occupations are represented to a 
significantly lower degree8. 

There is a more even distribution when looking at the different educational sectors that respondents from 
the subgroup are linked to. All levels of education are represented, from early childhood education and 
care  to  non-formal  and  adult  education.  Most  of  the  265  respondents  currently  active  in  an 
education/training sector represent upper secondary education (general education) (31 %), followed by 
primary education (25 %), and lower secondary education (general education) (22 %). Non-formal (6 %) 
and cross-sectoral education (6 %) are the least represented. It is also relevant to highlight that more 
than a quarter of the discussed subgroup is active in more than one educational sector. 

7  Public  authority  or  government  (10 %),  education  and  training  representative  organisation  (5 %),  civil  society  sector/NGOs/ 
voluntary organisation (3 %), research organisation /  think tank (3 %), organisation providing non-formal learning opportunities 
(3 %), trade union (3 %), employers’ representative (<1 %), private business (<1 %), ‘other’ (2 %) – please note that 20 % did not 
provide any details in this context [n=265]. 
8Leader or member of senior management of an education and training institution (8 %), researcher (at all stages of their career, 
including pre-doctoral) (6 %), professional/ administrator in education and training institutions (non-teaching) (5 %), policymaker 
(2 %), welfare/ counsellor/ youth worker (2 %), student/learner (all types in all sectors, including trainees and apprentices) (>1 %), 
‘other’ (6 %) – please note that 20 % did not provide any details in this context [n=265]. 

7 

 
                                                           
Significant differences between survey responses by different subsamples are highlighted where relevant 
in chapter 2 of this report. Likewise, the views of strongly represented subgroups, such as respondents 
active as teachers, trainers, or educators, are emphasised where it makes sense. 

1.3.4. 

Position papers 

In  connection  with  the  OPC  survey,  25  position  papers  were  submitted  by  different  stakeholders. 
Additionally, 3 documents with written feedback to the Proposal for a Council Recommendation were sent 
by email, resulting in a total of 28 received position papers. A total of 21 papers was submitted on behalf 
of  one  (or  more)  organisation(s),  such  as  Pan-European  and  international  stakeholder  organisations, 
Member  States,  NGOs,  educational  professionals  as  well  as  national  and  European  trade  unions9.  The 
remaining 7 papers were sent on behalf of Member States (5) or submitted in an individual capacity (2). 

Out of all 28 position papers, 19 are providing recommendations and/or expressing critical views directly 
related  to  the  Council  Recommendation,  whilst  the  remaining  9  papers  share  information  of  a  more 
indirect  relevance,  such  as  academic  articles  on  educational  approaches  and  specific  projects10.  Key 
perspectives and findings from the position papers are presented together with outcomes of the other 
conducted consultation activities in the summary below. 

2.  Summary of the consultation results 

This chapter provides a factual description of the results of the OPC and the outcomes of four targeted 
consultation workshops as outlined in section 1.1. Initially, some general feedback by stakeholders 
concerning the PSS initiative is presented. Afterwards, key findings of the conducted consultation 
activities are presented according to the structure of the OPC survey since this approach allows for a 
systematic summary. 

The integrated approach of the initiative is welcomed and seen as necessary 

Stakeholders generally welcomed that the PSS initiative seeks to promote the educational success of all 
learners  by  considering  a  wide  range  of  factors  impacting  on  how  learners  fare  and  thrive  in  the 
educational  system.  It  is  underlined  by  a  range  of  stakeholders  that  underachievement  and  ELET  are 
multifaceted  problems  and  that  disadvantaged  learners  often  face  many  of  the  obstacles  to  school 
success identified throughout conducted consultation activities (see section 2.1) simultaneously. There 
was therefore wide agreement among stakeholders that the PSS initiative should address these obstacles 
in a holistic manner to establish a solid foundation for the school success and well-being of all learners. 

Calls for clear operational definitions of the PSS initiative’s central terms 

In its submitted position paper, the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education called for 
refined  operational definitions, particularly  for  prevention,  intervention and  compensation.  The agency 
suggested for these definitions to consider the aspect of time. Prevention should thus be understood as 
avoiding something before it happens, intervention as a support measure whilst something is ongoing, 
and compensation as a way to address something after it has happened. However, this suggestion is not 
new. The temporal aspect was already included in the 2011 Council Recommendation on policies to reduce 

9 Other represented organisations include a European network of school student unions, an organisation representing European 
education employers, a policy network on migrant education, a private company, an EU Horizon 2020 project, and a campaign 
advocating for a greater focus on ECEC. 
10 They also covered an assessment tool for literacy skills, detailed information on an educational reform in a Member State, and 
a description of how ’virtual schools’ and ’virtual school heads’ have in the past monitored and supported children in care. 

8 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
early  school  leaving  and  its  use  of  the  terms  prevention,  intervention  and  compensation  was  largely 
inspired by it. 

The  Cypriot  Ministry  of  Education,  Youth,  Sport  and  Culture  strongly  recommended  the  European 
Commission to take up the discussion on the relationship between educational equity as fairness (access 
despite  personal  and  social  circumstances)  and  educational  equity  as  inclusion  (ensuring  a  minimum 
standard of education for all), as outlined in an OECD paper11. The need for equal access to quality and 
inclusive education (as stated in the 1st principle of the European Pillar of Social Rights) was also stressed 
by the European Trade Union Committee for Education (ETUCE), which strongly recommended the set-up 
of comprehensive policy measures under the cooperation of ministries and education social partners. 

Additionally, and as further discussed in section 2.1 below, several stakeholders called for a more holistic 
understanding  of  school  success.  According  to  organisations  representing  both  parents,  students  and 
education employers, the concept should not only be linked with minimum standards for achievement of 
basic skills. Instead, a successful education should be understood as encouraging lifelong learning and 
leading learners to become active and mature citizens capable of confronting life and future challenges 
in a responsible and autonomous way. 

Briefly summarised, stakeholders call for clear operational definitions of all central terms to ensure that 
objectives of the PSS initiative as well as the means to fulfil these are described and applied on the basis 
of a common understanding. 

Possible side effects of compensation measures must be considered 

At  the  stakeholder  workshops,  it  was  emphasised  that  the  EU  must  consider  potential  negative  side 
effects of support measures. The establishing of special needs schools was mentioned as an example, 
which  led  to  increased  educational  segregation  and  had  negative  and  adverse  social,  economic  and 
educational effects. Likewise, the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education stated in 
its position paper that the EU must be clear on the impact of compensatory measures currently used in 
some  countries,  such  as  separate  special  schools  and  segregated  provisions  for  some  socially 
disadvantaged  groups,  since  there  are  social,  educational  and  economic  arguments  against  these 
compensatory  approaches12.  Additional  comments  by  OPC  respondents  further  emphasised  that  policy 
interventions and their social impact should be assessed before being more widely implemented. 

2.1. 

Obstacles and problems hindering school success 

Most conducted consultation activities explored the obstacles and problems that can hinder children and 
young people to succeed in school education, both at a systems level (in terms of national/regional/local 
policies) and at school level.  Although obstacles are  presented and discussed  rather isolated below, it 
must  be  pointed  out  that  this  is  a  result  of  the  analytical  process.  As  highlighted  in  several  position 
papers, for instance that of the Dutch Ministry of Education, the factors hindering school success of all 
learners are often intertwined and related. 

Socio-economic background and the support at home are crucial for school success 

OPC respondents considered the socio-economic background and the support at home as factors of crucial 
importance  for  school  success.  According  to  them,  parents’  socio-economic,  cultural  and  educational 
background  (33 %),  insufficient  parental  engagement  in  their  children’s  education  and  in  school  life 

11 Field, S. Kuczera, M., Pont, B., & Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). No more failures: Ten steps to 
equity in education. Paris: OECD. 
12 A Guide for ensuring inclusion and equity in education - UNESCO Digital Library 

9 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
(22 %) and unsupportive home environment and resources (lack of space for learning, lack of tools and 
materials, lack of appropriate nutrition, etc.) (22 %) are some of the most pressing main factors hindering 
children and young people to achieve school success. 

Reflecting these results, a range of position papers emphasised that some learners may struggle with 
educational  achievement  due  to  their  parents’  lack  of  income,  education  or  social  capital.  Some 
stakeholders emphasised, for instance, that an increasing number of learners from disadvantaged socio-
economic backgrounds are starting to work at a young age, leaving school or training early because they 
lack  support  at  home  or  need  to  financially  support  their  parents.  Further,  a  position  paper  by  the 
stakeholder  organisation  Eurochild13  identified  poverty  and  social  exclusion  as  key  obstacles  for  the 
school success of some learners: 

 “Many children living in poverty or social exclusion do not receive a healthy meal every day, cannot 
afford to attend school trips, buy the required books or school equipment, participate in after-school 
activities,  or  access  online  learning.  Education  is  often  assumed  to  be  free  for  children,  but  for 
children growing up in poverty these extra costs are everyday barriers to their access and success 
in learning.” 

(Source: OPC position paper) 

The paper by Eurochild stated further that nearly one in four children in the EU were affected by poverty 
or social exclusion before the Covid-19 crisis, which is likely to have aggravated the situation. 

In support of this argument, the First Years First Priority campaign underlined in its position paper that 
poverty  affects  the  physical  and  psychological  development  of  children  in  multiple  ways,  whilst  also 
putting pressure on parents and caregivers, making it harder for them to attend to their children’s needs. 
According to the campaign, some population groups, such as Roma children, migrant and refugee children, 
as  well  as  those  with  disabilities,  are  more  likely  to  be  affected  by  severe  poverty.  In  short,  these 
vulnerable children are faced with social and cultural barriers to learning and development. 

Other position papers referred to achievement or performance gaps between children from more and less 
advantaged  groups.  The  European  Federation  of  Education  Employers,  for  example,  pointed  out  that 
learners  with  a  migrant  background  typically  lag  behind  native-born  or  other  non-migrant  learners  – 
regardless of whether or not they manage to acquire basic skills. At the second round of consultation 
workshops, it was therefore recommended to offer additional support to newly arrived migrants as soon 
as possible. 

Teacher education and training is essential but requires time and resources 

Another essential factor highlighted as an important obstacle to school success by more than one-quarter 
of  all  OPC  respondents  is  related  to  teacher  education  and  training.  Thus,  27 %  of  OPC  respondents 
underlined that educators (teachers and trainers)  are not adequately prepared to deal with pupils with 
cumulative disadvantages. 

Several OPC respondents expanded on this pressing obstacle in additional comments, underlining that 
the  lack  of  adequate  education  and  training  of  teachers  as  well  as  insufficient  resources  provided  to 
them (both in terms of time and infrastructure) are issues to be addressed by the PSS initiative. One OPC 
respondent  argued  that  teachers  and  educators  entering  the  educational  system  are  not  adequately 
skilled to provide high-quality education, because their education at university does not include training 
in relevant methodologies and didactics, nor does it put enough emphasis on practical experience and 
tests. Likewise, several position papers stated that teacher education needs to be reviewed to provide 

13 Eurochild is a network of organisations and individuals working with and for children in Europe. Their position paper is submitted 
on behalf of the Including Children Affected by Migration Programme 

10 

 
 
                                                           
future  teachers  with  the  necessary  skills  and  competences  to  understand  and  efficiently  address 
educational disadvantages (as further discussed in section 2.3.1). 

At  the  same  time,  workshop  participants  pointed  out  that  a  lack  of  financial  incentives  and  a  heavy 
workload  can  hinder  teachers  and  educators  from  participating  in  additional  training  to  improve  their 
skills. Finally, and on a more general level, teacher shortage was highlighted as a significant problem in 
the context of several consultation activities. 

Causes for negative learning experiences must be addressed 

A  significant  share  of  OPC  respondents  identified  factors  related  to  negative  learning  experiences  of 
individuals as main obstacles to school success. Specifically, it was underlined that learning contents and 
methods are not interesting and relevant for pupils (25 %), that pupils do not feel involved in their learning 
and in school life (22 %) and that there is lack of individualised support by the school when necessary 
(21 %).  

These factors were also recognised as problematic by  a range of stakeholder organisations. Regarding 
the failure to involve all students in their learning and in school life, for example, the European Agency 
for Special Needs and Inclusive Education stated in its position paper: 

“Very often learners are treated in a tokenistic or even manipulative way, and their voices not acted 
upon.  Teachers  and  leaders  don’t  trust  that  learners  have  valid  views  which  can  contribute  to 
decisions that affect their lives.” 

(Source: OPC position paper) 

Other stakeholder organisations  highlighted specific  instances where the voices  of  learners should be 
taken into greater account to address underachievement and ELET. The Organising Bureau of European 
School Student Unions (OBESSU), for instance, stated that school students should be involved in shaping 
the  content  of  teacher  education  aimed  at  providing  teachers  with  the  skills  to  address  educational 
disadvantages.  

In  terms  of  learning  methods  that  are  not  interesting  for  learners,  OBESSU  emphasised  that  frontal 
teaching can be particularly disengaging, which is why the organisation called for a greater use of more 
participative  alternatives,  such  as  project-based  learning  activities,  debates  and  other  forms  of  peer 
learning. These activities, it can be argued, would in turn also give greater opportunities for learners to 
make their voices heard. Further, the Ministry of Education in Malta argued on the basis of experiences 
with remote schooling during the Covid-19 crisis, that a blended learning approach is a way forward to 
improve the quality, relevance as well as inclusiveness of education and training.  

Last, but not least, the lack of individualised support by schools was generally recognised as an issue 
that must be addressed. This was first and foremost evidenced by recommendations from a number of 
stakeholders as to  how the individual needs  of learners should be addressed. As  discussed  in greater 
detail in section 2.3.1, these include alternative ways of learning and teaching, for instance strengthening 
the  role  of  non-formal  education  and  extra-curricular  activities,  the  development  of  individualised 
education plans, and home-language tuition (where this language differs from the language of instruction 
at school). 

Overview of survey responses regarding main obstacles to school success 

Table 2 below summarises to what extent different OPC respondent groups have identified factors listed 
in the survey as main obstacles to school success in their country.  

11 

 
 
 
 
Looking at the importance of the socio-economic, cultural and educational background, this factor was 
more  often  highlighted  by  teachers,  trainers  or  educators  and  NGOs  (37 %  each)  than  by  students, 
learners,  parents  or interested citizens and representatives  of  an academic/research institution  (25 % 
each). On the other hand, the latter subgroup more often identified learning contents and methods not 
interesting and relevant for pupils as a hindering factor than NGOs (38 % vs 13 %). Students and NGOs 
highlighted to a greater extent the lack of individualised support by the school when necessary (27 and 
33 % vs 21 %) as a main obstacle to school success. It can also be pointed out that 17 % of NGOs and 
14 % of students, learners, parents or interested  citizens identified poor  teachers/pupils relationships, 
unsupportive learning climate at school as a main hindering factor, whilst this was only true for 7 % of 
teachers. The lack of well-trained special support educators was emphasised by NGOs (20 %), while only 
10 % of all respondents identified this as a major obstacle. 

Table 2: Main obstacles to school success (per respondent category)14 

Measures 

Individual  characteristics  (e.g.,  special  needs, 
social and emotional difficulties, etc.) 

Insufficient knowledge of the main language of 
instruction 

Parents’ 
educational background 

socio-economic, 

cultural 

and 

Insufficient  parental  engagement 
children’s education and in school life 

in 

their 

Unsupportive home environment and resources 
(lack  of  space  for  learning,  lack  of  tools  and 
materials, lack of appropriate nutrition, etc.) 

Family  related  difficulties  (multiple  children, 
single parents, violence etc.) 

Lack of IT infrastructures, devices and Internet 
connectivity 

High concentration in the same school of pupils 
who  are  disadvantaged  on  the  basis  of  their 
socioeconomic,  ethnic  or  cultural  background, 
their level of ability 

Pupils do not feel involved in their learning and 
in school life 

Lack  of  individualised  support  by  the  school 
when necessary 

Learning  contents  and methods  not  interesting 
and relevant for pupils. 

Poor teachers/pupils relationships, unsupportive 
learning climate at school 

Violence, bullying at/around school 

Students / 
learners, 
parents or 
interested 
citizens 

All 
respon-
dents 

Teachers, 
trainers, 
educators 

Academic
/ research 
institution 

Non-
governmental 
organisation 
(NGO) 

25% 

23 % 

27% 

23% 

20% 

6% 

9 % 

4% 

6% 

3% 

33% 

25% 

37% 

25% 

37% 

22% 

27% 

29% 

21% 

17% 

22% 

23% 

18% 

15% 

20% 

11% 

5% 

15% 

6% 

10% 

11% 

16% 

13% 

15% 

10% 

16% 

16% 

13% 

13% 

13% 

22% 

18% 

28% 

19% 

13% 

21% 

27% 

18% 

19% 

33% 

25% 

32% 

29% 

38% 

13% 

10% 

8% 

14% 

11% 

7% 

7% 

10% 

8% 

17% 

7% 

14 Respondents could select up to 3 elements. Results for the free text options ‘Other characteristics of the education system’ and 
‘Other’ are excluded from the table. Relevant additional comments received are instead highlighted in the descriptive text. 
(Students/learners, parents or interested citizens, n=44; teachers, trainers, educators, n=136; academic/research institution, n= 
48; NGO, n=30) 

12 

 
 
                                                           
(teachers 

not 
Educators 
adequately  prepared  to  deal  with  pupils  with 
cumulative disadvantages 

trainers) 

and 

27% 

20% 

25% 

33% 

20% 

Lack of well-trained special support educators 

Lack  of  accessibility  to  quality  early  childhood 
education and care 

10% 

7% 

9% 

0% 

9% 

4% 

10% 

20% 

10% 

17% 

Source: Open public consultation on the EEA initiative Pathways to School Success (2021) 

It is noteworthy that only a very small share of survey respondents marked the following factors as three 
of the most important obstacles for the school success of children and young people: 

Lack of accessibility to quality early childhood education and care 
Insufficient knowledge of the main language of instruction 

 
 
  Violence, bullying at/around school 

At the same time, a range of stakeholders highlighted the importance of these factors in their position 
papers, whilst OPC respondents recommended measures to address some of these issues in the context 
of other survey questions, as described below and in sections 2.3 and 2.4. 

The  factors  hindering  school  success  discussed  during  the  remainder  of  this  section  were  mainly 
emphasised  in  replies  to  open  survey  questions  as  well  as  in  position  papers  and  during  stakeholder 
workshops. 

Bullying and discrimination hinder progress on inclusive education 

Whilst only a small share of OPC respondents (8 %) considered bullying at and around school to be among 
the most important obstacles to school success, the issue was raised in several position papers as well 
as  additional  comments  to  the  OPC  survey.  Reflecting  the  views  of  several  OPC  respondents,  the 
Organising Bureau of European School Student Unions (OBESSU) stated: 

“Research has shown  that  bullying and cyberbullying  have harmful consequences on a learner’s 
mental health and puts the victim at risk of dropping out of school.” 

(Source: OPC position paper) 

The  student  union  also  recommended  that  schools  design  activities  to  raise  awareness  on  the 
consequences  of  bullying  and  set  up  mechanisms  to  identify  bullying  practices  within  the  school 
community at an early stage. One approach would be to appoint and train resource persons that victims 
of bullying can access and refer to. OBESSU also argued that schools should provide free psychological 
and legal support. 

A joint position paper by several umbrella organisations15 promoting the rights of European lesbian, gay, 
bisexual, trans and/or intersex (LGBTI) learners emphasised that these groups to a greater extent face 
discrimination and bullying in school. Referring to results from the 2019 FRA (European Union Agency for 
Fundamental  Rights)  LGBTI  Survey  II,  the  position  paper  stated  that  almost  half  of  15-17  year  old 
respondents have experienced discrimination in school with larger shares of trans and intersex children. 
It  was  further  highlighted  that  many  LGBTI  learners  face  bullying  and  online  harassment  within  their 
school community, whilst at the same time not feeling supported enough to confide in teachers or other 
support staff. Among the stated consequences are the fear of LGBTI learners to be open about themselves 
and a higher risk of ELET. 

15 IGLYO, OII Europe, TGEU, ILGA Europe 

13 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
Other position papers emphasised that further minority groups, such as learners living in poverty or those 
from Roma and other ethnic minority backgrounds, tend to be met with prejudices and discrimination in 
and  around  school.  There  was  agreement  among  stakeholders  that  this  has  negative  impacts  on  the 
mental health and motivation to stay and participate in school of the affected individuals. 

Last but not least, some position papers and OPC respondents pointed out that some groups of learners, 
such as those living in poverty or having a migrant background tend to be met with negative perceptions 
or prejudices in the educational  system. Respondents criticised, for example, that some teachers have 
low expectations in terms of their ability to succeed in education. 

Criticism of oversized classes and separate education 

According to OPC respondents, further factors hindering schools success include oversized classes that 
do not enable teachers to provide an appropriate individual attention to learners lagging behind, poorly 
equipped  classrooms,  as  well  as  a  high  concentration  of  disadvantaged  learners  in  some  educational 
institutions. As one workshop participant pointed out, disadvantaged learners may be further challenged 
when  attending  schools  that  need  additional  funding  and/or  feature  relatively  large  classroom  sizes. 
These schools are likely to lack the resources and support staff required to ensure that all students in 
need of individual support receive adequate help. 

Extending on the above, several position papers highlighted the lack of diversity and inclusion in some 
ECEC  and  school  settings.  The  stakeholder  organisation  Eurodiaconia  stated  in  its  position  paper  that 
segregated schooling is an issue negatively affecting Roma children: 

“Segregated  schools  are  still  a  reality  for  many  Roma  children,  which  not  only  hinders  social 
cohesion, but also their present and future civic engagement, and democratic participation. Both 
physical segregation and social marginalisation result in a disproportionate number of early school 
leavers among Roma pupils.” 

Additionally, several stakeholders underlined that some learners with disabilities do not have access to 
mainstream  education  (see  section  2.4).  Last  but  not  least,  the  First  Years  First  Priority  campaign 
criticised ethnic segregation in ECEC settings, stating a lack of inclusiveness and differences in the quality 
of care provided as direct obstacles to school success. Further, the campaign’s position paper argued that 
many  families  from  ethnic  minorities  or  migrant  backgrounds  are  frequently  exposed  to  such  issues, 
making them feel unwelcome in relevant ECEC settings. 

(Source: OPC position paper) 

Inclusion in education – need for a common understanding 

Participants  in  different  consultation  activities  highlighted  the  need  for  a  common  understanding  of 
inclusive  education.  At  one  of  the  workshops,  it  was  stated  that  the  concept  exclusively  refers  to  the 
educational  inclusion  of  children  with  special  needs  and  disabilities  in  some  countries.  One  workshop 
participant shared the following definition of the concept and suggested its wider application to promote 
support measures for all learners: 

“Inclusive  education  aims  to  allow  all  learners  to  achieve  their  full  potential  by  providing  good 
quality education to all in mainstream settings with special attention to learners at risk of exclusion 
and  underachievement  by  actively  seeking  out  to  support  them  and  responding  flexibly  to  the 
circumstances  and  needs  of  all  learners,  including  through  individualised  approaches,  targeted 
support and cooperation with the families and local communities.”  

(Source: ET 2020 Working Group on Promoting Common Values and Inclusive Education) 

14 

 
 
 
The lack of knowledge on how to involve learners and their families in this process, in a manner that is 
not ‘tokenistic’, was criticised by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education in its 
position paper. Several other stakeholders agreed that more is needed to truly consult and act on the 
voices of learners and to empower them to contribute to decisions that affect their lives. However, the 
Agency  for  Special  Needs  and  Inclusive  Education  emphasised  that  teachers  do  not  always  trust  that 
learners have valid views when it comes to such decisions. Further, its position paper also underlined the 
fact  that  learners  and  their  families  may  not  always  agree  and  have  competing  rights,  which  is  an 
individual  issue  for  attention.  (Received  recommendations  as  to  how  inclusion  in  education  and 
collaboration with  learners’ parents and families  can  be  further developed are summarised in section 
2.3.2). 

Focus on grades and achievement versus learning – a delicate balance 

Several OPC respondents argued that there is too much focus on achievement in terms of grades rather 
than learning in the educational system. It is mentioned that the system can be too rigid, as individual 
learners may be forced to repeat a school year due to the results of a single exam. Similar views were 
expressed  during  one  of  the  targeted  consultation  workshops,  where  it  was  stated  that  the  current 
standardisation  of  curricula and assessments can be seen as  obstacles to school  success as they,  for 
example, can stand in the way of informal educational activities. Assessments were also identified to be 
among the key causal factors for Early leaving from education and training (ELET) and adverse experience 
with schools of some learners. According to workshop participants, learners who fail exams at school may 
miss  out  on  the  opportunity  to  see  the  value  of  learning,  have  less  motivation  than  other  groups  for 
lifelong learning and experience possible negative economic and social consequences (see, for example, 
Innoval project research from the Lifelong Learning Platform). 

On this background, the position paper of the European Council for Steiner Waldorf Education criticised a 
one-size-fits-all  approach.  The  organisation  instead  recommended  the  use  of  different  assessment 
methods, namely personalised, formative, ipsative and dialogic approaches. According to the council, this 
allows for a greater focus on individual learning dispositions and needs that supports more meaningful 
learning experiences by those being assessed. In a similar manner, the Organising Bureau of European 
School Student Unions (OBESSU) recommended focussing on assessments that focus on the individual 
progress of learners rather than on competitiveness and performance when tested. 

Providing an additional comment, one OPC respondent expressed the view that schools should not only 
focus  on  helping  young  persons  to  acquire  knowledge,  but  also  support  them  in  the  development  of 
psychosocial skills: 

“We focus on knowledge, forgetting that a pupil is above all a child, a young person with his story, 
his life, his feelings and that this too can be worked on.” 

(Source: OPC online survey) 

Education is a path to active citizenship and well-being - not only the labour market 

Extending on some of the points raised above, the European Federation of Education Employers (EFEE) 
emphasised that the central mission of education is not only to provide students with the skills needed 
to enter the labour market, but also to accompany young people  on their journey of becoming active, 
responsible citizens for whom lifelong learning can be an enriching and crucial part of their personal as 
well as professional development. 

This point of view was echoed in a range of position papers. The Organising Bureau of European School 
Student Unions (OBESSU) took it as a point of departure for a more general criticism of the ‘name and 

15 

 
 
 
narrative’  of  the  PSS  initiative.  The  organisation  argued  that  too  much  focus  is  put  on  educating  and 
training the future workforce, for instance by measuring underachievement in relation to the acquirement 
of maths, reading and science skills whilst not considering other subjects essential for the development 
of critical thinking or civic engagement. Likewise, the European Parents’ Association (EPA) criticised that 
educational  success  continues  to  be  strongly  linked  to  the  obtention  of  ‘good  grades’.  EPA  suggested 
using  the  concept  of  ‘maturity’  instead,  stating  that  all  young  people  at  the  end  of  their  school  time 
should be mature, meaning: 

“[able] to confront life and the future challenges in a responsible and autonomous way, to make 
independent  and  well-informed  decisions  and  to  continue  developing  their  unique  full  potential 
over the lifespan – consequences that can hardly be expressed in grades.” 

(Source: OPC position paper)  

Some OPC respondents and position papers by various stakeholders likewise recommended that the PSS 
initiative  should  support  holistic,  life-long  learning.  The  Lego  Group,  for  example,  underlined  the 
importance of communication, collaboration, and problem-solving skills, arguing that their promotion will 
empower  learners  to  become  creative  and  engaged  life-long  learners.  In  a  similar  manner,  different 
stakeholders called for an increased focus on the personal and social development of learners. 

At the targeted consultation workshops, it was elaborated that the social and emotional development of 
learners  is  crucial  for  preventing  underachievement  and  ELET  as  well  as  promoting  the  well-being  of 
learners at school. One identified problem is therefore the lack of attention given to the strengthening of 
their emotional and social competencies within education. According to workshop participants, there is a 
lack  of resources and funding for schools  to do this work,  partly due to a continuing  focus on formal 
educational achievements and the lack  of professional capabilities in schools.  The  BOOST project was 
mentioned at one workshop as an example for efforts to change the situation. It was recognised at the 
workshops that changes to the curriculum design may be needed for the wider recognition of ‘inclusion-
related’ skills, such as coping with stress, building awareness on bullying, intercultural competencies, and 
other transversal skills for well-being. 

Lack of diversity among educational staff should be addressed 

At the targeted consultation workshops, it was also highlighted that there is a lack of diversity among 
the  educational  staff  in  many  schools,  for  example  in  terms  of  different  professional  and  ethnical 
backgrounds.  This  was  stated  to  mean  that  the  value  of  inclusion  is  not  always  reflected  by  the 
composition of teachers and educators at schools (or other educational institutions) and that perhaps not 
all students can identify themselves with a teacher or educator as a role model. Some position papers 
likewise recommended promoting diversity in the teaching force, for example by involving minority ethnic 
teachers which may boost the sense of belonging among learners with similar backgrounds.  

The  European  Federation  of  Education  Employers  (EFEE)  also  suggested  opening  up  the  teaching 
profession to individuals with different backgrounds. In its position paper, the organisation recommended 
increasing the number of female science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) teachers to 
overcome skill stigmatisation and motivate more girls to acquire STEM skills. Further, EFEE argued that 
allowing  more  interested  outside  professionals  and  individuals  with  a  migrant  background  into  the 
teaching profession would contribute to boosting its attractiveness and help address teacher shortages 
faced by various European countries. 

Freedom of teachers and autonomy at school level to be promoted 

16 

 
 
 
In the OPC, the limited freedom of teachers to adapt their teaching to the individual needs of pupils was 
named  as  a  further  obstacle  to  the  school  success  of  learners  with  one  respondent  criticising  that 
bureaucratic  educational  systems  hinder  creativity  in  teaching.  Adding  to  this  point,  some  survey 
respondents underlined the lack of pedagogical diversity in the education system, arguing that a greater 
range  of  teaching  approaches  are  needed  to  address  the  individual  needs  of  all  learners  at  risk  of 
underachievement or ELET. 

In a similar manner, workshop participants and OPC respondents identified the lack of autonomy at school 
level  as  a  problem,  stating  that  the  inclusion  of  all  learners  in  education  requires  head  teachers  and 
school directors to be able to take more decisions (e.g., on curricula, funding, or the hiring of teachers). 
Likewise, it was underlined in the position paper of the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive 
Education that schools, and other educational institutions, should be given more autonomy in devising 
their  own  measures  to  preventing  underachievement  and  ELET.  Top-down  approaches  (e.g.,  national 
policies), which are often designed as ‘one size fits all’ solutions, were stated to be problematic when it 
comes to translating them into practice at the school level. A representative from the educational ministry 
in Portugal raised the same issue at one of the workshops, stating that principals and teachers at the 
school level must be prepared and aligned with new measures if they are to be translated into practice. 
The  willingness  of  the  school  to  implement  new  measures  was  argued  to  be  essential,  as  was  the 
recognition of differences in national contexts and school cultures. Other workshop participants agreed 
that the implementation of any policy needs to be accepted, adopted and therefore also feasible at the 
micro-level. In line with  these findings, some OPC  respondents  pointed  out the need to  take teachers’ 
ideas and feedback into account when developing and introducing new measures to improve education 
and training. 

2.2. 

Impact of the Covid-19 crisis 

The COVID-19 crisis had a strong impact on the education system with many countries deciding to close 
schools  temporarily  and  introduce  remote  schooling.  The  school  closures  have  disrupted  students’ 
learning, social contact and exacerbated the digital divide that disproportionally impacts children living 
in poverty, as reported in Eurochild’s (2020) ‘Growing up in lockdown’ report. 

Overview of survey responses regarding the impact of the Covid-19 crisis 

Almost half of all respondents to the OPC survey (47 %) stated that the Covid-19 crisis had both negative 
and positive impact on the ability of the school education system to provide quality education in general, 
whilst  84 %  stated  that  the  pandemic  primarily  had  a  negative  impact  for  pupils  belonging  to  more 
vulnerable groups. Looking at the results by sub-groups of respondents, NGOs had a more critical point 
of view, with 73 % stating that the Covid-19 crisis primarily had negative impact in general, and 97 % 
considering that it had a mainly negative impact for vulnerable groups. 

This  assessment  was  reflected  in  a  range  of  position  papers  and  OPC  respondents  since  various 
stakeholders agreed that the pandemic put an additional toll on specific groups of learners. These include 
learners  with  no  or  limited  access  to  the  internet,  learners  with  special  needs,  and  those  lacking  a 
supportive home environment, such as children in institutional care, and parents facing financial pressure. 
Learners who struggled or were unable to receive remote schooling may have had no access to formal 
education  for  extended  periods.  The  stakeholder  organisation  Eurodiaconia,  for  example,  stated  that 
Roma  learners  living  in  poverty  effectively  have  missed  at  least  a  whole  year  of  formal  education. 
Additionally, there was wide agreement among the stakeholders having submitted position papers, that 
the Covid-19 pandemic has impacted on the psycho-social and emotional well-being of learners as they 
had less opportunities for socialisation and maintaining friendships. 

17 

 
 
 
A comment received in the OPC points into the same direction, indicating that economically-precarious 
children are also more likely to experience “learning loss”, meaning that they will need more time to catch 
up when reconvening school. 

The  figure below summarises to what  extent OPC respondents considered the impact of the Covid-19 
crisis to be negative or positive in terms of the ability of the national education system to provide quality 
education: 

Figure 3: Impact of the Corona crisis on the ability of the national education system to provide quality 
education16 

Source: Open public consultation on the EEA initiative Pathways to School Success (2021) 

When it comes to the negative factors resulting from the Covid-19 crisis, in particular for pupils belonging 
to more vulnerable groups, a combination of infrastructural problems (limited access to digital learning 
resources  –  55 %),  inadequate  skill  levels  of  teachers  (teachers  not  sufficiently  prepared  for  distance 
learning – 35 %) and individual factors (lack of individualised support during distance learning – 412 %; 
stress, depression, lack of motivation – 39 %) were emphasised by the OPC respondents. 

There  are  some  notable  differences  between  groups  of  respondents  as  some  of  the  most  prominent 
factors were weighted differently by various subgroups. Students/learners, parents or interested citizens 
interested  in this topic highlighted  to a greater degree  teachers not sufficiently  prepared for distance 
learning (55 %) and lack of suitable learning space at home (30 %) than teachers. At the same time, a 
greater  share  of  teachers,  trainers  or  educators  than  students/learners,  parents  or  interested  citizens 
identified stress, depression, lack of motivation (45 % vs 36 %), lack of contacts with teachers (24 % vs 
20 %), and lack of contacts with peers (32 % vs 23 %) as particular problems in the context of the Covid-
19 crisis. From the point of view of NGOs and academics/research institutions the limited access to digital 
learning resources is by far the most prominent factor (73 % and 58 %). 

Many of the negative impacts of the Covid-19 crisis stated above were also pointed out by a range of 
stakeholders in their position papers and at the first two consultation workshops. The European Trade 
Union Committee for Education (ETUCE), for instance, emphasised in its position paper that learners at 
risk of ELET, or those currently underachieving, may not have had appropriate access to IT equipment and 
internet  during  the  Covid-19  crisis.  ETUCE  member  organisations  in  several  countries  have  therefore 
urged governments to ensure paid additional working time for teachers to provide these groups with the 
support they need to catch up. 

16 n=309 

18 

 
 
 
                                                           
Table  3  below  summarises  to  what  extent  different  respondent  groups  identified  factors  listed  in  the 
survey as specific problems caused or rendered visible by the Covid-19 crisis. Respondents were prompted 
to particularly keep vulnerable pupils in mind when selecting up to three factors. 

Table 3: Specific problems caused or rendered visible by the Covid-19 crisis, particularly for vulnerable 
pupils (per respondent category)17 

Measures 

Lack  of 
during distance learning 

individualised  support 

Lack of contacts with peers 

Lack of contacts with teachers 

Limited  access  to  digital  learning 
resources  (IT  infrastructure  and 
equipment, Internet connectivity) 

Insufficient 
learners 

IT 

skills 

among 

Teachers not sufficiently prepared 
for distance learning 

Lack of parental support 

Lack of suitable learning space at 
home 

Stress, 
motivation 

depression, 

lack 

of 

Students / 
learners, 
parents or 
interested 
citizens 

All respon-
dents 

Teachers, 
trainers, 
educators 

Academic / 
research 
institution 

Non-
governmental 
organisation 
(NGO) 

42% 

28% 

24% 

55% 

13% 

35% 

24% 

22% 

39% 

36% 

23% 

20% 

55% 

14% 

52% 

16% 

30% 

36% 

38% 

32% 

24% 

55% 

20% 

29% 

26% 

16% 

45% 

50% 

42% 

21% 

58% 

17% 

25% 

19% 

13% 

40% 

43% 

23% 

27% 

73% 

3% 

43% 

20% 

30% 

27% 

Source: Open public consultation on the EEA initiative Pathways to School Success (2021) 

Difficulties with remote schooling 

Remote schooling during the Covid 19-pandemic constituted challenges to teachers as well as learners. 
In  a  comment  to  the  PSS  roadmap,  one  citizen  stated  that  the  Covid-19  crisis  has  highlighted  the 
inadequate  skills  of  some  teachers  to  efficiently  use  information  technology.  An  urgent  need  for 
additional training that provides teachers with greater digital skills to facilitate remote schooling, was 
also  expressed  by  workshop  participants  as  well  as  by  some  stakeholders  in  their  position  papers.  In 
relation to challenges posed by the pandemic, the international NGO Lumos stated: 

“Investing in education technology for all, teacher training, and other resources to ensure resilience 
to crises like COVID-19 are key.” 

The lack of motivation and involvement  of  some learners, leading to a refusal to show up  online and 
subsequent  isolation,  was  explicitly  mentioned  by  some  of  the  OPC  respondents  as  a  severe  negative 
impact  of  the  Covid-crisis,  in  particular  for  learners  from  vulnerable  groups.  In  further  additional 
comments, it was described that the lack of face-to-face visibility and supervision (sometimes combined 
with a lack of self-discipline among learners) created difficulties for teachers to reach and interact with 
some learners. In such cases, it was argued, the effectiveness of remote schooling depends to a large 

(Source: OPC position paper) 

17 Respondents could select up to 3 elements. Results for the free text option ‘Other’ are excluded from the table. Relevant additional 
comments received are instead highlighted in the descriptive text. (Students/learners, parents or interested citizens, n=44; teachers, 
trainers, educators, n=136; academic/research institution, n= 48; NGO, n=30) 

19 

 
 
 
                                                           
extent on the ability of parents or caregivers to motivate younger learners and ensure that they attend 
lessons online. 

The Ministry for Education in Malta emphasised in its position paper that remote schooling cannot replace 
or compensate for the lack of access to learning resources in the physical school environment that some 
learners may need more than others. National experiences have shown that there was a marked decrease 
in  the  quality  of  education  provided  to  learners  with  disabilities  in  Malta  during  the  pandemic.  Whilst 
these learners were provided with the necessary learning resources for online learning, they had no access 
to  specific  services,  support  and  resources  found  in  schools,  including  multi-sensory  rooms  and  other 
learning equipment. 

Finally, it was highlighted by a teacher in a comment to the OPC survey that it was particularly difficult 
to adapt the ‘stuffy’ curriculum for digital learning, which resulted in a workload that was too much for 
many learners at home. 

Lessons learned from the Covid-19 pandemic: more monitoring and early intervention 

During one of the targeted consultation workshops, the need for closer monitoring and early intervention 
linked to the Covid-19 pandemic was highlighted. One of its expected impacts is a significant increase in 
ELET, which will not be imprinted in the statistics before 2-3 years from now. Therefore, it is seen as 
essential to identify now, who is skipping school or at risk of dropping out. This issue was also raised in 
several position papers highlighting that the pandemic and its impact on education systems throughout 
the EU will have negative consequences on the learning paths of learners.  The European Federation of 
Education Employers (EFEE), for instance, argued that the expected rising numbers of early leavers from 
education and training triggered by the Covid-19 crisis represent an obstacle not only for the long-term 
recovery  of  European  economies,  which  requires  skilled  workers  to  successfully  manage  the  twin 
transition. Moreover, early leavers from education and training themselves face significant difficulties in 
both the labour market and daily life, being at a higher risk of poverty and social exclusion due to their 
limited education. 

Eurochild highlighted the impact of the Covid-19 crisis on the health and well-being of children and young 
people in its position paper. Besides referring to the outcomes of the ‘Growing up in Lockdown’ report 
(see beginning of this report section), the organisation also flagged relevant outcomes of a consultation 
with more than 10,000 children and young people aged 11-17 conducted during the Covid-19 pandemic18. 
According to the consultation, one in five children report growing up unhappy and anxious for the future. 
Children describe these alarming rates of mental ill-health as caused by anxiety about the future, bullying, 
challenges  in  coping  with  school-work  and  loneliness,  and  much  of  these  experiences  have  been 
compounded by the Covid-19 pandemic. 

Additionally, the Cypriot Ministry of Education, Youth, Sport and Culture highlighted in its position paper 
that the exceptional Covid-19 crisis calls for in-depth discussions between the Member States and the 
European Commission with regards to the expected impact of the pandemic on education and training 
(e.g.,  on  learning  loss;  inequalities;  impact  on  teachers  and  pupils’  well-being  etc.).  The  ministry 
recommended the exchange of evidence from national surveys and administrative data on the impacts 
of the crisis as well as the sharing of measures already implemented or to be taken in response to it. As 
proposed  by  the  ministry,  these  responses  may  include  the  planning  of  educational  and  revision 
programmes  which  focus  on  the  key  shortcomings,  the  development  and  dissemination  of  supportive 
educational material and resources, as well as the adequate updating and transformation of the curricula. 

18 The consultation ’Our Europe, our rights, our future’ was conducted for the upcoming comprehensive EU Strategy on the Rights 
of the Child and the European Child Guarantee. 

20 

 
 
                                                           
Last but not least, several position papers underlined that the impacts of the Covid-19 crisis also have 
led  to  positive  changes.  The  ministries  for  education  in  Flanders  and  Malta,  for  example,  agreed  that 
challenges  experienced  during  the  pandemic  led  to  new  solutions  and  working  methods.  A  specific 
example  is  the  shift  to  greater  reliance  on  digital  technologies  to  facilitate  education,  work  and 
communication.  Whilst  this  shift  was  difficult  for  some,  it  is  also  stated  as  having  provided  new 
perspectives on traditional learning and rendered new opportunities visible in terms of digital teaching 
approaches. 

2.3.  Measures to be prioritised and promoted in the new initiative 

Across all conducted consultation activities, measures that support all learners in reaching a certain level 
of proficiency in basic skills, minimise ELET, and promote the well-being of learners were discussed. A 
wide range of support measures were recommended that address many of the obstacles to school success 
mentioned in the previous two sections. 

2.3.1. 

Priority measures at the system level 

Regarding measures that could be implemented at the system level, all OPC respondents were prompted 
to select the most pressing among a list of presented options.  Table 4 below illustrates how different 
OPC  respondent  groups  prioritised  relevant  elements  that  may  contribute  to  the  promotion  of  school 
success for all children and young people: 

Table 4: Measures to be prioritised at system level to help all children and young people succeed at school 
(per respondent category)19 

Measures 

Ensuring access for all children to high-quality, 
affordable  and  adequately  staffed  early 
childhood  education  and  care 
(nurseries, 
kindergarten, etc., indicative age 0 to 6) 

Investing  in  training  of  educational  staff  to 
address  early  leaving  from  education  and 
training as well as underachievement 

Fighting  all 
forms  of  school  segregation 
(concentration of at-risk pupils in some schools 
or classes) 

Ensuring that  inclusion  is  a strong  component 
of the curriculum, of pupils’ assessment, and of 
all learning activities and materials 

Developing  the  conditions  for  a  language 
friendly environment at school 

Finding alternatives to repeating the academic 
year 

Developing  targeted  measures  to  address  the 
needs of more vulnerable pupils 

Students / 
learners, 
parents or 
interested 
citizens 

All 
respon-
dents 

Teachers, 
trainers, 
educators 

Academic 
/ research 
institution 

Non-
governmental 
organisation 
(NGO) 

45% 

48% 

38% 

40% 

43% 

49% 

39% 

46% 

50% 

47% 

27% 

32% 

25% 

25% 

37% 

37% 

32% 

38% 

44% 

43% 

11% 

14% 

10% 

15% 

9% 

9% 

12% 

15% 

7% 

7% 

39% 

43% 

39% 

38% 

47% 

19 Respondents could select up to 3 elements. Results for the free text option ‘Other’ are excluded from the table. Relevant additional 
comments received are instead highlighted in the descriptive text. (Students/learners, parents or interested citizens, n=44; Teachers, 
trainers, educators, n=136; academic/research institution, n= 48; NGO, n=30) 

21 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
to  different 
Avoiding  assigning  students 
educational  tracks  at  an  early  stage  (early 
tracking) 

Promoting  non-formal  learning  opportunities, 
including out of school activities 

Ensuring appropriate IT infrastructure, devices 
and Internet connectivity to all pupils 

9% 

18% 

8% 

6% 

27% 

36% 

31% 

31% 

24% 

14% 

32% 

23% 

7% 

20% 

27% 

Source: Open public consultation on the EEA initiative Pathways to School Success (2021) 

As the table above shows, there are few significant differences in terms of how the examined 
subgroups recommended prioritising the different listed measures at system level for the promotion of 
school success. Most prominently, students/learners, parents or interested citizens highlighted to a 
higher degree than teachers, trainers or educators the factors promoting non-formal learning 
opportunities, including out of school activities (36 % vs 31 %) and avoiding assigning students to 
different educational tracks at an early stage (early tracking) (18 % vs 8 %). By contrast, about one-
third of the last-mentioned subgroup considered ensuring appropriate IT infrastructure, devices and 
Internet connectivity to all pupils to be a measure that should be prioritised at system level, compared 
to only 14 % of students/learners, parents or interested citizens. NGOs prioritised to a higher extent 
than the aforementioned subgroup the developing [of] targeted measures to address the needs of more 
vulnerable pupils (47 % vs. 39 %) and the fighting [of] all forms school segregation (37 % vs. 27 %). 

A strong call for improving initial and continuous teacher training 

The  support  measure  at  system  level  which  should  be  given  the  greatest  priority  according  to  OPC 
respondents  is  investing  in  training  of  educational  staff  to  address  early  leaving  from  education  and 
training as well as underachievement (49 %). In additional comments, a range of respondents emphasised 
that teacher training should be based on scientific evidence, for example in relation to social impacts and 
which  teaching  approaches  have  proven  most  successful  to  promote  achievement  and  well-being  of 
learners as well as preventing ELET. As specific examples, the Successful Educational Actions developed 
as part of the project INCLUDE-ED: Strategies for inclusion and social cohesion in Europe from education 
were named several times in additional comments to the OPC survey. Other OPC respondents emphasised 
that  teacher  training  should  take  knowledge  from  neuroscience  and  developmental  educational 
psychology into account to enhance the quality of education provided at educational institutions. 

Calls  to  invest  more  and  better  for  the  purpose  of  equipping  teachers  with  appropriate  skills  and 
competences  were  also  made  in  a  range  of  position  papers  and  they  were  echoed  at  the  targeted 
consultation workshops. There was broad agreement among stakeholders that teachers need to be better 
prepared and  enabled to carry out the work  required to achieve the aims  of the  PSS initiative. As the 
Covid-19 crisis has shown, additional efforts are needed to help teachers and educators acquire the skills 
they need to successfully manage and navigate new working contexts, such as remote schooling. 

Despite the required digital skills, teachers and educators also need to know how to promote the well-
being of learners as well as how to support learners at risk of underachievement. According to the position 
paper by the Cypriot Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport and Youth, this entails that teachers are able 
to differentiate their instruction methods in the classroom when facing students from different socio-
economic  backgrounds  and  with  different  learning  opportunities  at  home.  In  this  context,  several 
stakeholders underlined in their position papers that the initial and ongoing training of teachers must 
also provide them with necessary skills for working with parents and families. 

Additionally, one workshop participant pointed out that teachers also need to be capable of recognising 
the varying learning speeds of individual learners and to identify at an early stage, which learners may 
require additional support. Adding to this point, several position papers underline that it is crucial to adapt 
initial and continuous teacher education and training to the needs of disadvantaged groups of learners. 

22 

 
 
The stakeholder organisation Eurodiaconia, for instance, recommended mandatory trainings for teachers 
on inclusive teaching methods. Teach For All, a global network of NGOs, highlighted a recently started 
Erasmus+  project  in  this  context,  which  focusses  on  mentoring  for  new  teachers  in  disadvantaged 
schools20. 

The role of teachers as well as the size of their task was summarised by an OPC respondent stating that: 

“…skilled teachers must lay the foundation for school success, regardless of the intellectual skills 
or the financial background of learners. Teachers must not segregate, they find individual solutions, 
providing formal and non-formal learning.” 

(Source: OPC online survey) 

The  European  Trade  Union  Committee  for  Education  (ETUCE)  argued  in  its  position  paper  that  good 
working conditions are essential for teachers to fill out this role. According to the union, it is crucial to 
prepare teachers well, since the PSS initiative foresees reforms  on curricula, pedagogies, assessment, 
and  enhancing  teachers’  ability  in  tackling  educational  disadvantage.  It  is  the  view  of  ETUCE  that 
continuous professional development should be available for all levels of education at working hours and 
free of charge, whilst initial teacher training and continuous professional development should sufficiently 
include  real life practice in  education institutions and  train all teachers up to a  master’s level. It was 
further mentioned in some position papers that ongoing professional development can make the teacher 
profession  more  attractive  and  relevant  as  it  can  increase  both  competences  and  motivation  of  the 
workforce. 

In agreement with the findings stated above, OPC respondents  underlined  the importance  of ensuring 
that  teachers  can  fulfil  their  educational  duties  in  enabling  and  constructive  environments.  Some 
respondents pointed out that there is need for an improved social recognition of teachers, arguing that it 
must  be  ensured  teachers  receive  decent  salaries.  It  was  further  recommended  to  protect  them  from 
psychosocial risks and excessive workloads which may cause stress. As one respondent described it, the 
excellent support of teachers is a prerequisite for the provision of excellent education. 

Universal access to affordable, high-quality early childhood education and care 

A significant share  of OPC  respondents (45 %) indicated that ensuring access for  all  children  to  high-
quality, affordable and adequately staffed early childhood education and care should be a key feature of 
the PSS initiative. 

This  support measure was  also emphasised as being  of crucial importance in  several  position papers. 
There  was  broad  agreement  among  stakeholders  that  high-quality  ECEC  improves  the  well-being  of 
children and their chances to succeed once they are in school. Two position papers in particular (from the 
trade union Early Childhood Ireland and the First Years First Priority campaign) emphasised that ECEC 
contributes positively to the cognitive, physical, emotional, and social development of children in their 
earliest years. Public investment in early childhood is further described as one of the most effective policy 
measures governments can take: 

“Investing  early  in  nurturing  care  for  all  children  is  essential  for  their  healthy  development  – 
physical and mental – and lifelong learning, and for the well-being and prosperity of society.” 

Other position papers argued that some disadvantaged groups, such as migrant or refugee children, may 
already at the start of school lag behind their peers, for example when it comes to skills in the language 

(Source: OPC position paper) 

20 The Erasmus+ project, ”Novice Educator Support and Training” (NEST)   

23 

 
 
                                                           
of instruction, if they do not attend ECEC. According to the First Years First Priority campaign, the level 
of enrolment in ECEC is lower for vulnerable children, including those with special needs or from lower 
socio-economic  groups,  compared  to  the  enrolment  rates  of  the  general  population  in  all  EU  Member 
States.  Likewise,  workshop  participants  highlighted  the  importance  of  additional  funding  for  ECEC  to 
bridge the gap between young learners from ethnic minorities or with a migrant background and their 
peers. It was stated that there may be a lack of inclusion, a workforce not prepared for addressing the 
specific needs of these learners and a lack of diversity among education personnel. Workshop participants 
argued that the quality of services and diversity in the workforce will not only have an immediate impact 
on those receiving ECEC, but also on their education later on in life. 

On this background, it was recommended in several position papers to ensure that especially families in 
vulnerable situations have access to childcare for 0–3-year-olds. The NGO ATD Fourth World France, for 
example, points out that such childcare typically is available to parents working normal working hours. 
At the same time, parents with low-income jobs and unusual working hours, such as those working early 
or late shifts for cleaning companies, may struggle to find appropriate ECEC services for their child. It 
was therefore generally recommended by different stakeholders that the PSS initiative should promote 
greater access to affordable, high-quality ECEC. 

Targeted support measures for vulnerable learners 

The development of targeted measures to address the needs of vulnerable pupils was seen as an element 
to be prioritised by 39 % of the OPC respondents 

A number of measures aimed at supporting vulnerable learners were recommended in a range of position 
papers. These include fostering new ways of learning and teaching, for instance strengthening the role 
of non-formal education and extra-curricular activities which may not only help learners improve their 
skills in  the  language  of instruction, but also contribute to the  formation  of transversal competences, 
such as conflict resolution, interpersonal expression, and creative thinking. In this context, it should be 
highlighted  that  27 %  of  OPC  respondents  stated  that  the  PSS  initiative  should  promote  non-formal 
learning opportunities, including out of school activities.  

It was likewise argued that learners’ motivation to learn can be addressed by supporting their agency in 
cognitive, practical and artistic fields. In this context, the European Council for Steiner Education stated 
that schools need to cater to the diverse needs of a heterogenous student population making it important 
to  offer  a  curriculum  that  addresses  the  specific  developmental  needs  of  learners  as  well  as  their 
individual learning dispositions. 

Several  position  papers  recommended  additional  measures  aimed  at  vulnerable  pupils,  such  as  after-
school support, increased pedagogical assistance, and language services. The Sirius Policy Network, for 
instance,  recommended  providing  learners  with  a  migrant  background  with  access  to  home-language 
tuition,  stating  that  this  will  boost  proficiency  in  both  home-language  and  newly  acquired  languages. 
Likewise, it was stated by workshop participants that some learners experiencing difficulties may benefit 
from being taught in the language spoken at home, if it is different to the official language of instruction. 
A research paper on multilingualism by the EEPN was shared in this context. In its position paper, the 
Department  of  Education  and  Training  of  the  Flemish  Government  emphasised  that  knowledge  of  the 
language of instruction from an early age is a crucial factor for the school success of all learners. The 
department points out that Flanders has begun to language screen all learners at the start of compulsory 
education and has introduced mandatory language integration programmes for those with insufficient 
skills in the language of instruction as well as for all non-Dutch-speaking migrants entering the national 
education system. The early screening of language competencies was also welcomed by stakeholders at 

24 

 
 
the second round of consultation workshops, as this may allow for the identification of and swift response 
to additional learning needs, possibly even before affected learners fall behind. 

Further, some stakeholders emphasised the potential of specific teaching approaches to engage learners. 
As  mentioned previously, it was recommended to incorporate  more participative  approaches in school 
curricula, including project-based learning, debates and other types of peer learning activities. Following 
lessons learned from the Covid-19 crisis, the Ministry of Education in Malta called for a wider use of a 
blended learning approach. At the same time, the ministry acknowledged that remote schooling and the 
use of digital technologies shall not and cannot replace the personal and social experiences that stem 
from  being  part  of  a  school  community.  These  findings  are  in  line  with  comments  made  on  blended 
learning at the second round of conducted workshops, where the concept was discussed by stakeholders. 
They agreed that blended learning should be understood very broadly as involving various pedagogical 
methods/approaches combining remote learning and presence learning as well as learning taking place 
in various environments involving interactions with a multitude of stakeholders and peers - also outside 
of the school setting. It was also commented that the Commission recently has published a proposal for 
a Council Recommendation on blended learning. 

Greater focus on inclusion in education 

With 37 %, a significant amount of OPC respondents emphasised the need for ensuring that inclusion is 
a strong component of the curriculum, of pupils’ assessment, and of all learning activities and materials. 
This  finding  underlines  that  OPC  respondents  want  the  Council  Recommendation  to  help  all  groups  of 
learners feel accepted and involved in their school life, whilst learning contents and methods should be 
adapted to their different needs. One approach of achieving this, according to OPC respondents and other 
stakeholders,  is  listening  to  the  views  and  opinions  of  learners  and  their  families,  when  it  comes  to 
decisions affecting the education of learners. To create positive and inclusive school environments, it was 
considered essential to provide learners and their families with opportunities to share their views on how 
schools address educational needs. 

Further, 27 % of OPC respondents called for the Council Recommendation to  fight all forms of school 
segregation  (concentration  of  at-risk  pupils  in  some  schools  or  classes).  That  school  segregation  is  a 
problem to be addressed is reflected in a range of OPC comments and position papers criticising that 
some groups of learners, including those with disabilities, institutionalised learners, or those with ethnic 
minority  backgrounds,  tend  to  be  educated  in  separate  classes  or  educational  institutions  and  thus 
experience  educational  exclusion.  In  a  similar  manner,  several  stakeholder  organisations  argued  that 
some marginalised groups, such as learners with a Roma background, or LGBTI learners, may not feel 
accepted or represented at school, since learning materials lack positive messages on these groups and 
tend to contain negative representations or stereotypes instead. Additionally, a number of stakeholder 
organisations emphasised that teachers need additional training to understand and address the particular 
needs of marginalised groups, if these are to be included in education. 

Finally, OPC respondents recognised that learners at risk of underachievement and ELET need access to 
the equipment necessary for attending, following and/or participating in lessons. In this context, 24 % of 
OPC  respondents  highlighted  that  the  PSS  initiative  should  help  ensure  appropriate  IT  infrastructure, 
devices and internet connectivity to all pupils. Given that OPC respondents highlighted the socio-economic 
background of learners to be crucial for school success, this must be seen as part of an effort to give all 
learners equal opportunities and access to education. 

Since  the  dimension  of  inclusion  in  education  is  closely  linked  to  the  well-being  of  learners  and  the 
creation of positive learning environments, results of the consultation activities related to it are presented 
in greater detail in section 2.3.2. 

25 

 
 
More flexible schooling pathways 

Other recommended support measures at system level were briefly discussed at the workshops, and/or 
mentioned in additional comments to the OPC. One example stated during both consultation activities is 
the creation of flexible schooling pathways accounting for preferences and strengths of the individual 
learner.  Central  authorities  could  help  address  this  need  by  revising  curricula  and  looking  at  the 
transitions  between  educational  levels.  Further,  some  OPC  comments  argued  that  those  having  left 
education or training early should be helped to re-enter the educational system by being provided with 
alternatives to traditional education and training. It was also recommended to provide learners with early 
and continuous guidance in terms of possible educational and vocational pathways. Some position papers 
reflect these perspectives calling for the opening of as many schooling pathways as possible to empower 
all learners to achieve their potential. In a similar  manner, some  OPC respondents recommended  that 
non-academic  qualifications,  should  be  more  widely  recognised  and  promoted,  also  in  terms  of  giving 
access to career opportunities. 

At  the  consultation  workshops,  it  was  further  stated  that  learners  can  be  motivated  to  take  greater 
responsibility of their own learning when educational options are better suited to personal strengths and 
preferences. However, it was also acknowledged that the creation of more flexible schooling pathways 
requires the cooperation of different stakeholders at both the systematic and school level. 

Finally, it must be mentioned that a wide range of recommendations discussed during the remainder of 
this report can be considered targeted measures to support vulnerable learners; specific examples are 
the  strengthening  of  inclusion  in  education  and  the  involvement  of  parents  and  families  in  learners’ 
education (section 2.3.2) as well as the promotion of well-being at school (section 2.4). 

2.3.2. 

Priority measures at school level 

As  part  of  the  OPC  survey,  respondents  were  also  prompted  to  identify  those  support  measures  that 
should be prioritised by the PSS initiative at school level. Table 5 below shows to what extent different 
respondent categories considered options listed in the survey as particularly important: 

Table 5: Measures to be prioritised at school level to help all children and young people succeed at school 
(per respondent category)21 

Measures 

Providing effective and individualised support 
to pupils 

Accepting  and  valuing  linguistic  diversity  in 
schools, including minority languages.  

Promoting  a  ‘whole  school  approach’  to 
school success for all, in which all members 
of  the  school  community  (school  leaders, 
teaching  and  non-
middle  management, 

All 
respon-
dents 

Students / 
learners, parents 
or interested 
citizens 

Teachers, 
trainers, 
educators 

Academic 
/ research 
institution 

Non-
governmental 
organisation 
(NGO) 

43% 

10% 

41% 

11% 

44% 

42% 

9% 

10% 

43% 

10% 

64% 

50% 

67% 

60% 

70% 

21 Respondents could select up to 3 elements. Results for the free text option ‘Other’ are excluded from the table. Relevant additional 
comments received are instead highlighted in the descriptive text. (Students/learners, parents or interested citizens, n=44; Teachers, 
trainers, educators, n=265; Academic/research institution, n= 48; NGO, n=30) 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
teaching  staff,  pupils,  parents  and  families) 
feel responsible and play an active role  

Engaging families and pupils in the school’s 
daily life and decision making 

Promoting  cooperation  between  schools, 
local organisations and services (NGOs, local 
authorities, business, public libraries, cultural 
centres etc.) 

Promoting  cooperation  amongst  schools 
locally,  nationally  and  across  Europe 
(including  through  the  School  Education 
Gateway, eTwinning, EPALE, Erasmus+). 

Developing  calm  and  stimulating  learning 
spaces for pupils after the formal school time, 
within  school  buildings  (after  school  time 
extra-curricular activities) 

Developing  a  strategy  with  concrete  actions 
to make the school more inclusive 

35% 

30% 

34% 

38% 

33% 

32% 

39% 

26% 

25% 

50% 

26% 

25% 

28% 

29% 

10% 

29% 

34% 

45% 

30% 

32% 

38% 

36% 

44% 

17% 

47% 

Source: Open public consultation on the EEA initiative Pathways to School Success (2021) 

Looking at the results presented in the table above, the ‘whole school approach’ was prioritised more by 
NGOs (70 %) than students, learners, parents, or interested citizens (50 %). The first-mentioned subgroup 
also had a greater tendency to emphasise developing a strategy with concrete actions to make the school 
more  inclusive  (47 %  vs  34 %).  A  view  which  was  shared  by  academic  and  research  institutions. 
Conversely,  students/learners,  parents  or  interested  citizens  recommended  prioritising  the  following 
measures to a greater degree than NGOs:  Developing calm  and stimulating learning  spaces for  pupils 
after the formal school time, within school buildings (45 % vs 17 %). All categories of respondents agreed 
to a similar extent that providing effective and individualised support to pupils is a priority at school level. 

A whole school approach to school success and cooperation in and around school 

OPC  respondents  clearly  identified  the  need  for  promoting  a  ‘whole  school  approach’,  in  which  all 
members of the school community feel responsible and play an active role, as the support measure at 
school  level  which  should  be  given  the  highest  priority.  Altogether,  almost  two  thirds  of  all  survey 
respondents (64 %) highlighted the urgency of this measure. Putting further emphasis on the need for 
all members of the school community to work towards the creation of inclusive learning environments,  
34 % of OPC respondents  highlighted developing a strategy with concrete  actions to  make  the school 
more  inclusive,  whilst  32 %  stressed  the  importance  of  promoting  cooperation  between  schools,  local 
organisations and services. 

This  was  confirmed  by  the  consultative  workshops,  where  participants  underlined  the  importance  of 
collaboration  between  schools,  parents,  civil  organisations  and  other  relevant  stakeholders  to  create 
supportive learning environments for students. Dialogue between schools and the surrounding world at 
the local, regional and national level should be fostered to promote common efforts for the realisation 
of PSS initiative’s aims. This perspective was also echoed in additional comments by OPC respondents as 
well as in some position papers. The European Federation of Education Employers (EFEE), for instance, 
argued for the need to strengthen the dialogue in the school eco-system. EFEE recommended promoting 
increased  communication  and  collaboration  between  school  heads,  teachers  and  students  on  the  one 
hand,  as  well  as  between  school  systems  and  the  external  community  of  stakeholders,  such  as 
researchers, ministries, and public employment services, on the other. 

At the second round of consultation workshops, participants generally welcomed support measures for 
stakeholder collaboration. However, there were different perspectives on what is required to promote, for 
instance, the involvement of a range of services and professionals in the school community. One workshop 
participant  argued  that  it  is  important  to  place  social  workers,  pedagogues,  and  other  support  staff 

27 

 
 
needed  to  implement  the  PSS  objectives  at  individual  schools,  whilst  acknowledging  that  this  would 
involve significant costs. 

OPC  respondents  emphasised  further  that  learners  can  greatly  benefit  from  extra-curricular  or  non-
formal  activities  facilitated  in  partnership  with  stakeholders  in  the  local  community,  including  those 
outside of school hours. One respondent suggested, for instance, to make schools and related services 
accessible during the weekend to allow learners and their families to participate in recreational, sports 
and cultural activities. In a similar manner, the national trade union Early Childhood Ireland stated that 
participation in after-school programmes has been associated with increased self-esteem of learners and 
their greater bonding to school. Informal learning in these programs was argued to lead to more positive 
social behaviours and academic achievement. 

At the first two consultation workshops, it was recommended further that a strong collaboration between 
the families of learners and their schools is to be fostered, since such a relational approach is deemed to 
increase the learners’ sense of belonging and motivation to learn. One workshop participant argued that 
families  play  an  essential  role  for  the  motivation  of  learners  to  engage  in  lifelong  learning,  thereby 
underlining  once  more  the  importance  of  empowering  families  and  learners  to  influence  the  learning 
environment and educational outcomes. The European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education 
emphasised in its position paper that the ‘whole school approach’ is linked to inclusive cultures within 
education, as discussed later on in this section. At one of the stakeholder workshops, the Open Schools 
for Open Societies project was mentioned as an example of how to create engaging learning environments 
characterised by close relations between schools and local communities. As pointed out by a citizen in 
feedback to the roadmap, such relations can contribute to the sharing of knowledge and practices related 
to identifying and dealing with challenges of the individual learner. 

Individual learning plans and assessments to promote school success 

OPC  survey  results  show  that  the  second-most  prioritised  support  measure  is  providing  effective  and 
individualised support to pupils as it was highlighted by 43 % of respondents. In the received position 
papers, stakeholders likewise called for the individual support needs of all learners to be recognised and 
addressed.  The  ministry  for  education  in  Flanders,  for  example,  argued  that  learners  must  receive 
effective,  tailor-made  support.  Other  position  papers  underlined  the  need  for  individualised  education 
plans in this context. This call was echoed in a comment to the PSS initiative’s roadmap by a citizen, who 
emphasises the need to focus on the development of individual learning plans for all learners to monitor 
strengths and weaknesses as well as to identify individual learning aims and outcomes. Providing greater 
detail, the Sirius Policy Network on Migrant Education recommended individualised education plans for 
all migrants as a formal method to include the views of all those surrounding learners on their education. 

At  the  stakeholder  workshops,  it  was  argued  that  another  relevant  approach  could  be  the  wider 
application of assessments that are more flexible and individually tailored to different groups of learners, 
as previously discussed in section 2.1. Ireland and Estonia were named as examples of good practice, 
where such innovative forms of assessment are being used. 

The voices of all learners and their families must be heard 

A significant share of OPC respondents (35 %) considered engaging families and pupils in the school’s 
daily  life  and  decision  making  to  be  among  the  most  important  support  measures  at  school  level.  As 
reflected  in  received  position  papers  and  at  consultation  workshops,  there  is  wide  agreement  among 
stakeholders  that  this  support  measure  should  be  prioritised  by  the  PSS  initiative.  One  approach  for 

28 

 
 
 
achieving this, which was suggested in the OPC, is the use of annual questionnaires allowing parents and 
families to voice their opinions in terms of how schools address the educational needs of their children. 

Stakeholders recommended efforts by teachers and other relevant educational staff to strengthen their 
dialogue  with  parents  and  families  of  learners.  Participants  at  the  second  round  of  consultation 
workshops  specifically  welcomed  inclusive  approaches  towards  parents  and  families  of  learners  from 
disadvantaged  backgrounds.  At  the  same  time,  these  stakeholders  emphasised  that  some  of  these 
caregivers may have had adverse experiences with education or in school, making it more challenging for 
teaching staff to engage them in the education of their children. Other groups, such as parents with a 
minority ethnic background, may need to be informed about how the relevant educational system works, 
which should be done as early as possible. Other workshop participants underlined that all parents and/or 
families must be able to understand communications from school about their children’s education. This 
is  a  requirement  for  involving  everyone  in  the  school  community  and  it  is  therefore  important  that 
communication  efforts  are  adjusted  where  needed,  for  example  where  parents  and/or  families  have 
limited reading skills or competences in the language of instruction at school. 

However,  efforts  to  involve  caregivers  should  not  focus  on  improved  communication  alone.  Several 
position papers and workshop participants emphasised the need for stronger relations between the school 
setting and home environment, which is argued to help learners feel recognised  and thrive as well as 
supporting  educators  in  recognising  how  best  to  address  learners’  individual  needs.  OPC  respondents 
likewise recommended strengthening the direct participation and collaboration of learners, their parents 
and  teachers.  On  this  background,  the  European  Parents’  Association  pointed  out  the  example  of  the 
home-school-liaison-officer scheme in Ireland and the UK, where a teacher usually can dedicate some 
years exclusively to building positive relationships with the families of learners as well as providing them 
with low-threshold guidance. According to the association, the decisive influence of parents and families 
on  the  education  of  learners  is  well-documented  and  positive  engagement  with  those  surrounding 
learners at home can outweigh socio-economic and other negative impacts. 

In its position paper, the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education stated the ability of 
learners and their families to actively take part in decision-making as a key prevention strategy closely 
linked with a positive and inclusive school climate. Recognising that more knowledge is needed on how to 
achieve this, the agency recommended that schools create inclusive environments where learners feel 
safe, and they and their families are being provided with concrete opportunities to voice their views, for 
example on the life and activity of a given school. The NGO ATD Fourth World France highlighted that 
current practices are far removed from this ideal. According to the organisation, teachers lack the time 
and formal setup for real exchange with parents and families. Instead, the limited contact with the home 
environment  is  primarily used to convey  school results of learners and not  for the discussion  of their 
individual needs. 

Finally,  some  position  papers  emphasised  the  importance  of  especially  listening  to  the  voices  of 
disadvantaged and marginalised by current education systems and practices, such as those from minority 
ethnic  backgrounds  or  institutionalised  learners  left  out  of  mainstream  education.  The  stakeholder 
organisation  Eurodiaconia,  for  instance,  underlined  that  the  Roma  community  tends  not  to  trust 
authorities due to fears that their  children  may be taken away from them.  This  makes  it  essential to 
implement measures to overcome mistrust of Roma families in school administrations, for example by 
actively reaching out to them. 

Promoting ideal learning environments 

As pointed out earlier, some of the support measures aimed at the school level listed in the OPC survey 
were of particular importance to specific respondent subgroups. Students, learners, parents or interested 

29 

 
 
citizens, for instance, prioritised to a higher degree than educational practitioners the development of 
calm and stimulating learning spaces (45 % vs 32 %). 

The  creation  of  calm  and  stimulating  learning  spaces  is  related  to  the  promotion  of  well-being  in 
education,  which  is  examined  closer  in  section  2.4.  However,  some  additional  comments  by  OPC 
respondents underlined the importance of this measure by calling for the PSS initiative to ensure that 
the physical learning environment is suitable, for instance in terms of the noise level in classrooms, the 
indoor climate and the sanitary facilities. As already mentioned (see section 2.1), comments were also 
made on the size of classes, suggesting that they either should be limited to a maximum of around 20 
students, or that students more regularly are divided into study groups. In contrast to more dominating 
views on inclusive education, one respondent suggested creating study groups according to skill level. The 
respondent explained that this could eliminate demotivation by students who are stressed because they 
feel like performing worse than some of their peers and to avoid that excelling students feel held back 
by those needing additional instructions and help. 

2.4. 

Priority measures to promote well-being at school 

Well-being at the school level is defined as a multidimensional variable in the OPC, including for learners 
to feel safe, valued and respected as well as contributing and belonging to their school community. The 
OPC  survey  provided  respondents  with  a  list  of  factors  that  can  contribute  to  the  development  of  a 
positive learning environment and promote well-being at school. Respondents were prompted to select 
between one and three of the factors that they consider to be urgent. 

Table 6 below illustrates how OPC respondents prioritised among a range of measures for the promotion 
of well-being at school: 

Table 6: Factors contributing to a positive learning environment (per respondent category)22 

Measures 

Schools  publicly  welcome  diversity  and  visibly 
cherish  pupils  of  diverse  colours,  diverse 
languages, diverse abilities and disabilities, diverse 
genders  and  sexual  orientations,  diverse  ways  of 
clothing, diverse religions and cultures 

Training  educational  staff  on  well-being  at school, 
diversity  and  inclusion,  gender  equality,  bullying 
and mental health 

Collecting  data  on  school  climate,  well-being, 
bullying and violence at school 

Strengthening social and emotional learning to help 
pupils  feel  and  show  empathy  for  others  and 
establish and maintain supportive relationships 

Developing 
involving also parents and the community 

antibullying 

effective 

strategies, 

Students / 
learners, 
parents or 
interested 
citizens 

All 
respon-
dents 

Teachers, 
trainers, 
educators 

Academic 
/ research 
institution 

Non-
governmental 
organisation 
(NGO) 

30% 

36% 

25% 

31% 

43% 

52% 

43% 

46% 

52% 

80% 

12% 

9% 

6% 

17% 

7% 

55% 

52% 

58% 

33% 

53% 

29% 

30% 

29% 

29% 

33% 

Allowing for time, space and resources for pupils to 
discuss  about  well-being  and  express  their  needs 
and concerns 

27% 

25% 

37% 

46% 

20% 

22 Respondents could select up to 3 elements. Results for the free text option ‘Other measures’ are excluded from the table. Relevant 
additional  comments  received  are  instead  highlighted  in  the  descriptive  text.  (Students/learners,  parents  or  interested  citizens, 
n=44; Teachers, trainers, educators, n=136; academic/research institution, n= 48; NGO, n=30) 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Developing actions to promote positive relations at 
school, cooperation and teamwork 

Increasing co-decisions of pupils at classroom and 
school 
to  encourage  empowerment, 
involvement and responsibility 

level 

Promoting 
activities 

interaction  with  cultural  and  sport 

35% 

27% 

38% 

33% 

23% 

30% 

41% 

34% 

33% 

14% 

18% 

15% 

8% 

23% 

13% 

Source: Open public consultation on the EEA initiative Pathways to School Success (2021) 

Across  the  subgroups  of  respondents,  teachers,  trainers  and  educators  as  well  as  representatives  of 
academic and research institutions consider it highly important to allowing for time, space and resources 
for pupils to discuss about well-being and express their needs and concerns (37 % and 46 % respectively). 
Students, learners, parents or interested citizens, on the other hand, prioritise to a greater degree efforts 
to increase co-decisions of pupils at classroom and school level to encourage empowerment, involvement 
and responsibility (41 %) to be among the support measurements that should be prioritised by the PSS 
initiative.  These  results  confirm  the  findings  stated  earlier  in  relation  to  hearing  and  considering  the 
voices of learners (section 2.3.3). 

Finally, it can be mentioned that collecting data on school climate, well-being, bullying and violence at 
school as well as the promotion of interaction with cultural and sport activities are not considered to be 
particularly urgent support measures by OPC respondents, at least not in comparison to the other options 
listed in the survey. 

Strengthening learners’ well-being through relevant teacher training 

Altogether, more than half of all respondents highlight the need for strengthening social and emotional 
learning  to  help  pupils  feel  and  show  empathy  for  others  and  establish  and  maintain  supportive 
relationships (55 %) as well as training educational staff on well-being at school, diversity and inclusion, 
gender equality, bullying and mental health (52 %). With a share of 80 %, especially representatives from 
NGOs recommend prioritising the latter  support measure  for the  promotion  of  learners’ well-being as 
well as diverse and inclusive learning environments. The particular emphasis on teacher training is not 
surprising, given that a significant share of OPC respondents (49 %) also highlighted investing in teacher 
education and training as a support measure to be prioritised by the PSS initiative at system level. Since 
this factor was already examined in detail in section 2.3.1, it shall not be treated further here. Instead, 
additional  stakeholder  views  on  supporting  the  social  and  emotional  development  of  learners  are 
presented below. 

The importance of students’ mental and physical well-being 

The promotion of well-being is an essential part of the PSS initiative, both as an objective in its own right, 
but also as a factor preventing underachievement and ELET. Students who feel well and secure in their 
learning environment can thrive and are able to unfold their potential, for instance by learning and playing 
creatively as well as building meaningful relationships with others. This was echoed by Eurochild in its 
position  paper,  which  underlined  that  a  focus  on  social  inclusion  and  well-being  increases  children’s 
chances to reach their full potential. 

The importance of promoting learners’ social and emotional well-being was mentioned earlier (section 
2.1), where it was also highlighted that bullying is an issue that needs to be addressed in this context. At 
the stakeholder workshops, it was discussed to support the well-being of learners through monitoring 
activities that could assess the self-esteem and resilience of learners in order to identify those in need 
of additional social or emotional support. 

31 

 
 
 
In general, stakeholders expressed their support for the PSS initiative’s focus on promoting the well-being 
of all learners. OPC respondents highlighted that one important factor in this context is the creation of 
positive  and  stimulating  learning  environments.  A  range  of  stakeholders  underlined  that  social  and 
emotional  learning  is  likewise  essential.  It  should  be  facilitated  to  support  all  learners  in  feeling  and 
showing empathy as well as developing and maintaining positive relationships. In line with this finding, 
35 %  of  OPC  respondents  recommended  developing  actions  to  promote  positive  relations  at  school, 
cooperation  and  teamwork,  a  support  measure  closely  linked  to  the  promotion  of  ideal  learning 
environments mentioned earlier (2.3.2). 

Both position papers and OPC respondents stated that the PSS initiative should consider issues related 
to  mental  disorders,  such  as  depression  and  anxiety,  as  well  as  addressing  the  continuing  stigma 
surrounding learning difficulties to ensure that their nature and impacts are more openly discussed. On 
this background, some comments to the OPC survey underlined that an increasing number of children and 
young people indicate to have mental health problems hindering them to thrive and engage actively in 
school. It was therefore recommended to ensure that professionals in education are better prepared to 
address issues concerning these problems. 

Putting an emphasis on the impact that isolation has on well-being, the Lego Group pointed out that many 
children have missed out on the opportunities for social interactions with peers during the Covid-19 crisis. 
To  address  issues  surrounding  under-achievement,  the  business  organisation  therefore  recommended 
ensuring that education systems support the emotional well-being of these children by rebuilding their 
confidence and restoring their sense of community. Further, the Organising Bureau of European School 
Student Unions (OBESSU) argued: 

“Well-being  should  be  at  the  core  of  this  initiative  and  should  be  an  indicator  when  monitoring 
schools’ success in fighting early school leaving.”  

(Source: OPC position paper) 

Whilst  it  was  not  highlighted  by  OPC  respondents,  the  position  paper  by  the  World  Youth  Alliance 
emphasised  the  importance  of  sports  activities  in  regard  to  promoting  well-being.  The  organisation 
argued  that  these  activities  enhance  the  motivation,  self-control,  anger  management,  and  stress 
management of learners. At the same time, doing sports can help participants feel part of a peer group, 
making these individuals less likely to abandon their studies.  The same point  was raised  in additional 
comments by several OPC respondents. 

Finally, it must be emphasised that measures to promote inclusion in education are highly relevant for 
creating the positive school environments that are necessary to foster the well-being of all learners. As 
described  in  greater  detail  below,  stakeholders  generally  called  for  greater  inclusion  and  diversity  in 
education to help all learners thrive and succeed in their school environment. 

Ensuring that all groups of learners can attend and feel included in education 

There was extensive agreement among stakeholders that the PSS initiative should help promote inclusion 
and diversity in schools. At the workshops, there were calls for increasing the inclusiveness of education 
by enabling all learners with disabilities to attend mainstream educational settings. In a similar manner, 
the  international  NGO  Lumos  argued  in  its  position  paper  that  the  PSS  initiative  should  also  target 
institutionalised learners, a heterogeneous group consisting  of  individuals with disabilities and special 
needs  as  well  as  different  ethnic  minority  backgrounds,  among  others.  According  to  the  NGO, 
institutionalised  learners  often  lack  access  to  appropriate  education  in  their  local  community  and  are 
therefore at an increased risk of being placed in residential special schools far away from their families, 

32 

 
 
 
who might be able to care for their children given the right support. To foster the well-being of these 
learners,  Lumos  argued,  the  development  of  inclusive  education  should  facilitate  the  transition  from 
institutional to family and community-based care. 

Whilst  generally  criticising  school  segregation,  stakeholders  also  recognised  that  the  true  inclusion  of 
vulnerable  or  disadvantaged  groups  requires  more  than  granting  them  access  to  mainstream  school 
settings. Several factors are seen as essential for the successful integration of these groups, including 
targeted teacher training, adjustments to the content and approaches of teaching, review mechanisms, 
as well as support from other professionals than teachers, such as educational assistants, counsellors, 
psychologists or other health professionals. 

In  line  with  the  findings  above,  both  the  European  Disability  Forum  and  the  Portuguese  National 
Confederation  of  Organisations  of  Disabled  People  provided  PSS  roadmap  feedback  arguing  for  the 
greater inclusion of  those  with disabilities  in education. They emphasised the need to enable learners 
with disabilities to enrol in mainstream educational settings, for instance by removing barriers affecting 
their achievement of basic skills as well as enrolment in higher education. This may involve the removal 
of obstacles in the physical school environment or the provision of access to learning materials available 
in appropriate formats accessible to this group, such as materials in Braille and easy-to-read format, or 
sign language interpretation, subtitling in video contents, among other things. It was further pointed out 
that learners with disabilities might rely on teaching assistants to support them completing school. Some 
countries provide classroom learning assistants during primary school education, but then reduce their 
presence  as  of  secondary  school.  One  recommended  action  is  therefore  to  provide  the  necessary 
resources for special education teachers and classroom assistants to accompany and mentor learners 
with disabilities who need extra support in all levels of education. 

The ministries for education in the Netherlands and Flanders called for greater diversity in education in 
their position papers with the latter recommending that: 

“Schools openly support diversity and visibly rejoice at pupils with the most diverse  skin colours, 
languages, skills and disabilities, genders and sexual orientations, ways of dressing, religions and 
cultures.”  

(Source: OPC position paper) 

This call was echoed in several position papers and OPC comments arguing that minority groups should 
feel included and recognised in education. This may, for example, be achieved by considering the different 
linguistic and cultural backgrounds of learners  and perceiving them as something that can enrich and 
enhance experiences in school. Participants at the second round of consultation workshops likewise called 
for a wider recognition of learners’ entire linguistic repertoire. On this background, one OPC respondent 
recommended  having  educational  staff  in  schools  that  are  trained  for  and  focus  on  intercultural 
education. Reflecting this finding, the stakeholder organisation Eurodiaconia would like to see positive 
traits of Roma culture and heritage to be included in educational curricula, arguing that this could help 
learners  with  a  Roma  background  welcome  in  school  as  well  as  reflecting  positively  on  their  identity. 
Likewise, it was recommended in a joint position paper by several stakeholder organisations23 that school 
curricula  and  learning  materials  to  a  greater  extent  convey  positive  messages  and  avoid  negative 
representations  or  stereotypes  of  LGBTI  people.  The  organisations  also  underlined  that  teachers  lack 
training on how to include LGBTI content in their lessons as well as on how to prevent violence based on 
sexual orientation or gender identity and expression. It is further pointed out that schools can do more to 
recognise the gender identities of learners, for instance by respecting these in school documents, such as 
class lists. 

23 IGLYO, OII Europe, TGEU, ILGA Europe 

33 

 
                                                           
Some  stakeholders  pointed  out  that  undocumented  learners  with  a  migrant  background  encounter 
particular obstacles in the education system. As stated in comments to the OPC survey, they may not be 
able to take official exams, receive certification for studies completed, or get access to ECEC due to their 
residence status. It was further mentioned that families of undocumented learners might not experience 
schools as safe environments, due to legitimate fears that school administrators pass on information of 
learners’ residence status to immigration authorities. In short, the presented issues must be addressed 
to create inclusive learning environments for all learners. 

On a more general level, the European Trade Union Committee for Education (ETUCE) stated that inclusive 
education means allowing all learners to achieve their full potential by providing high quality education 
to all in mainstream settings with special attention to learners at risk of exclusion and underachievement. 
ETUCE agreed that it is essential to fight against school segregation, for instance by providing individual 
support to students at risk of dropping out. At the same time, the trade union highlighted that the most 
inclusive  way  of  help  is  ensuring  that  these  individuals  catch  up  with  group  work  and  are  enabled  to 
receive continued education with their peers. 

Finally,  it  was  pointed  out  in  both  position  papers  and  survey  comments  that  the  availability  of  role 
models can help all groups of learners feel recognised, which in turn may motivate them to pursue further 
educational goals. The importance of diverse teaching staff at schools was already mentioned in section 
2.1.  Additionally,  stakeholders  recommended  for  learners  to  be  presented  with  relevant  role  models 
having successfully completed education and entered the job market, with the example of women working 
in STEM-related occupations as a specific example to reflect positively on female learners. 

2.5. 

Additional recommended monitoring and prevention measures 

For the OPC survey, only respondents identifying as practitioners or organisations in the field of education 
and training (n=265) were asked about specific support measures related to monitoring and prevention, 
intervention  as  well  as  compensation.  Since  these  questions  prompted  the  respondent  subgroup  to 
consider elements which have partly been addressed already, there is a certain amount of overlap in the 
findings  presented  below  and  in  sections  2.6-2.7.  For  instance,  many  of  the  recommended  support 
measures  described  above  (sections  2.3-2.4)  represent  preventive  actions,  which  will  not  be  repeated 
here (e.g., the whole school approach, addressing individual support needs, and the creation of positive 
learning environments). 

Overview of survey responses regarding additional monitoring and prevention measures 

Monitoring and  prevention  measures  may be  implemented to promote  equal opportunities and ensure 
school success for all children and young people. Monitoring activities can be conducted to identify when 
interventions  are  needed  and  thereby,  for  example,  prevent  that  additional  support  needs  of  some 
learners are overlooked. In this sense, they are closely related to prevention measures which aim to avoid 
undesired  developments,  such  as  negative  learning  environments  characterised  by  bullying  or  social 
exclusion of some learners.  

Practitioners in the field of education and training as well as those representing organisations in this field 
were asked to identify up to three of the most urgent monitoring and prevention measures among a list 
of options as part of the OPC survey. 

Three  out  of  four  respondents  from  this  stakeholder  subgroup  (75 %)  considered  monitoring  and 
assessment at individual level, through early detection of pupils at risk and assessment of their needs, 
as a key element to ensure school success and avoid underachievement or ELET. Additionally, almost half 
of  these  respondents  (46 %)  recommended  the  implementation  of  quality  assurance  mechanisms 

34 

 
 
 
focusing  on  inclusion,  well-being  and  addressing  underachievement  and  the  provision  of  additional 
financial resources to schools with a high share of vulnerable pupils as relevant interventions. 

Table 7 summarises how educational practitioners and organisations in the field of education recommend 
prioritising monitoring and prevention measures: 

Table 7: Monitoring and prevention measures considered to be urgent (per stakeholder category)24 

Measures 

Early  detection  of  pupils  at  risk  and  assessment  of 
their  needs  (personal,  social,  economic, 
family 
related, etc.) and related intervention measures 

Early  warning  systems  (e.g.  based  on  frequent 
absenteeism, low grades and other indicators) 

Extra resources to schools with high concentration of 
vulnerable pupils 

Quality assurance mechanisms focusing on inclusion, 
well-being  and  addressing  underachievement  and 
early leaving from education and training 

Continuous  general  and  individual  educational  and 
career guidance 

Developing  policies  and  actions  to  actively  support 
diversity in schools 

Mapping  at  local  and  regional  levels  to  identify 
disadvantaged areas and at-risk schools 

All practitioners 
and organi-
sations in the 
field of education 

Teachers, 
trainers, 
educators 

Academic 
/ research 
institution 

Non-
governmental 
organisation 
(NGO) 

75% 

37% 

76% 

81% 

43% 

31% 

83% 

24% 

40% 

40% 

33% 

28% 

46% 

41% 

48% 

69% 

26% 

26% 

16% 

28% 

31% 

31% 

33% 

16% 

6% 

21% 

21% 

17% 

Source: Open public consultation on the EEA initiative Pathways to School Success (2021) 

Monitoring is essential for preventing underachievement and early leaving from education and training 

Regarding methods for early detection of students at risk of underachieving or ELET, there was broad 
agreement at the stakeholder workshops that there is a need for the systematic collection of high-quality 
data as the basis for prevention. It was argued that educational professionals who are to identify and 
support individuals at risk of underachievement or ELET need access to structured data related to their 
educational progress. Several participants highlighted that valuable data collection requires a strategic 
approach in terms of what to gather data on and which indicators to monitor. In a similar manner, the 
European Federation of Education Employers underlined the collection of solid data as an essential tool 
for the prevention of underachievement and ELET, whilst the Dutch Ministry of Education argued that the 
Commission should carefully assess the effectiveness of relevant monitoring measures before including 
them in the PSS initiative. 

Workshop participants and OPC respondents recommended collecting data on both progress of individual 
learners and on developments at the systemic level, meaning data on progress of schools as well as on 
the national education system as a whole. One OPC respondent suggested regular external evaluations 
of schools to ensure that they provide learners with quality education, whilst another recommended that 
data on the performance of schools should be available to the public.  

24 Respondents could select up to 3 elements. Results for the free text option ‘Other measures’ are excluded from the table. Relevant 
additional  comments  received  are  instead highlighted  in  the descriptive  text.  (All  practitioners  and  organisations in  the  field of 
education,  n=265;  teachers,  trainers,  educators,  n=136;  academic  /  research  institution,  n=48;  non-governmental  organisation 
(NGO), n=30). 

35 

 
 
 
                                                           
Additionally,  workshop  participants  highlighted  different  obstacles  monitoring  activities  targeting 
learners, including privacy concerns related to personal data on learners and a need to establish trust 
amongst all stakeholders for conducting such activities. At the same time, some enabling factors were 
stated, such as the possibility for exchange of best practices and monitoring solutions between Member 
States. 

Both  the  Cypriot  Ministry  of  Education,  Youth,  Sport  and  Culture  as  well  as  the  European  Agency  for 
Special Needs and Inclusive Education called upon policymakers to develop more sophisticated monitoring 
systems in their position papers. The agency states that: 

“…such  systems  should  log  a  range  of  educational  outcomes  (attainments,  progression  to  other 
educational  experiences,  employment  outcomes,  etc.).  They  should  do  this  at  the  level  of  the 
individual learner and should be able to link outcomes data to data on learners’ backgrounds and 
educational  experiences.  They  [policymakers]  could  also,  focus  on  supporting  schools  in 
understanding how best to use the data they already have available.”  

(Source: position paper by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education) 

In a similar manner, the Cypriot educational ministry underlined the need for evaluation mechanisms to 
measure  the  effectiveness  status  of  teachers,  schools  and  educational  systems  in  terms  of  their 
effectiveness regarding the promotion of quality and equity in education. 

The  importance  of  monitoring  efforts  for  the  prevention  of  underachievement  and  ELET  was  also 
emphasised  in  roadmap  feedback  by  the  European  Disability  Forum  and  the  Portuguese  National 
Confederation of Organisations  of  Disabled People.  They stated that the PSS initiative should support 
Member  States  in  collecting  more  and  reliable  quantitative  and  qualitative  data  on  children  with 
disabilities who are at  risk  of having learning difficulties. Monitoring  efforts during pre-schooling and 
early evaluations by speech therapists were mentioned as specific examples. 

Although workshop participants did not manage to discuss possible monitoring approaches in detail, they 
recommended  to  use  innovative  methods  to  monitor  the  subjective  well-being  of  learners  and  their 
families to support the development of positive learning environments. For the same purpose, the tracking 
of the well-being of educators and the level of inclusiveness of educational environments was suggested 
by some participants25. 

Finally, stakeholders discussed differences between Member States as to how they track young people, 
who drop out of school prematurely, at the workshops. One participant called for systematic monitoring 
to keep track of who re-enters the educational system and who may need additional support to do so. 
There may be political obstacles to setting up such early warning systems, for example unwillingness to 
finance these or some resistance in terms of political visibility of this phenomenon. However, due to the 
significant impact of COVID-19, obstacles may be easier to overcome. 

Last but not least, some OPC respondents recommended the  involvement  of several actors (teachers, 
social  workers,  psychologists)  in  monitoring  and  prevention  mechanisms  to  ensure  early  detection  of 
learners at risk of ELET. 

Evaluations and exams in support of monitoring efforts 

In direct relation to discussions on monitoring, workshop participants also emphasised the importance of 
evaluations, such as exams and other forms of testing. Whilst it can be challenging and even frustrating 

25 Some assessment tools were shared in this context, including a thorough methodology for measuring adult learners’ lifelong 
progress (Tampada digital assessment tool) and a customisable tool to help schools assess where they stand with learning in the 
digital age (SELFIE tool). Slovenia was named to have significant experience in tracking the well-being of individuals from the age 
of 16, whilst ETUCE and the EFEE have developed tools that can be used to assess the well-being of education personnel. 

36 

 
 
                                                           
for some learners to be evaluated, tests are of importance for monitoring educational achievements, for 
example in relation to basic skills. One participant underlined that assessments also function as pathways 
to  the  next  educational  level,  or  to  the  labour  market.  Recognising  that  some  group  of  learners  may 
struggle  with  traditional  and  formal  types  of  evaluation,  workshop  participants  recommended  giving 
schools greater autonomy to design their own assessment methods. These could be of a more flexible 
nature, whilst complying with targets for learning outcomes. 

At  this  point,  it  can  be  mentioned  that  the  position  paper  by  the  International  Association  for  the 
Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA)  focussed almost exclusively on the recommendation of  a 
particular assessment tool. IEA’s PIRLS (Progress in International Reading Literacy Study) can help schools 
evaluate to what degree fourth grade students are able to gain literary experience as well as acquire and 
use information when reading. 

Promoting key competences and equal opportunities for all students 

Besides  enhanced  monitoring  and  assessment  efforts,  other  preventative  methods  were  also 
recommended  and  discussed  in  the  OPC.  To  promote  the  well-being  of  students  and  their  personal 
fulfilment  and  development,  one  OPC  respondent  recommends  that  the  PSS  initiative  should  not  only 
focus  on  measurable  basic  skills  (reading,  mathematics  and  science),  but  be  broadened  to  include 
teaching  and  learning  on  key  competences,  such  as  multilingualism,  creativity,  EU  values,  whilst  also 
supporting students in gaining a sense of belonging. This perspective was echoed in the position paper by 
European Trade Union Committee for Education (ETUCE) and further supports findings stated earlier in 
section 2.1. 

On a more general level, OPC respondents strongly recommended ensuring the provision of sustainable 
funding to the educational  system. In survey comments, respondents  underlined that schools  must be 
given the necessary resources to be adequately staffed and empowered to support inclusion and address 
the needs of all learners (e.g., through social workers, psychologists, volunteers at all schools), whilst also 
arguing that access to education should be free/affordable for every family. The call for evenly distributed 
financing was also made. One OPC respondent highlighted that schools in poorer areas should be funded 
according to their needs and be provided with the necessary resources to be  equipped equally well as 
others, thereby creating equal opportunities for all learners. Another respondent pointed out that schools 
competing to receive financing tend to act as rivals rather than cooperating partners, arguing that greater 
support between schools is needed to promote equity in education. 

Finally,  the  need  to  decouple  school  success  from  the  socio-economic  background  of  students  was 
highlighted repeatedly in the OPC, as described previously in section 2.1, with respondents  underlining 
that more must be done to support disadvantaged groups of learners and their families, for example by 
providing  them  with  relevant  social  and  material  support.  On  this  background,  several  stakeholders 
recommended  specific  support  measures  targeting  parents  and  families  in  their  position  papers.  The 
European Parents’  Association (EPA), for instance, suggested  introducing adult learning in the form  of 
specific courses or ‘schools for parents’, which offer guidance to caregivers on how best to support the 
education of their children. The NGO ATD Fourth World France highlighted that the educational and career 
guidance for  learners and  their families should be  improved, for example  by enhancing access to and 
availability  of  educational  psychologists.  Calls  for  early  and  continuous  guidance  that  supports 
educational and vocational  pathways were also  made  by several  OPC respondents. Additionally, some 
respondents recommended opening schools up to local communities on weekends to allow for learners 
and families to participate in recreational, sports and educational activities in support of well-being and 
non-formal learning. 

37 

 
 
 
Promoting approaches that foster student motivation and participation 

In  line  with  some  of  the  findings  presented  above,  another  recommended  preventive  measure  is  the 
promotion  of  schools  as  learning  communities,  for  example  through  interactive  groups,  resolution  of 
conflicts and stronger relationships between students with different levels of achievement at school. The 
latter was further detailed by a OPC respondent suggesting supporting student self-help groups, where 
those  with  strong  skills  in  certain  subjects  support  peers  needing  help  with  these.  It  was  likewise 
suggested  that  schools  should  organise  and  facilitate  tutoring  libraries,  in  which  the  educational 
community participates outside of school hours. 

Additionally, respondents highlighted the need for didactic approaches that promote the motivation for 
students to learn as well as to get engaged in their local community as active citizens. On this background, 
the  Lego  Group  argued  for  the  importance  and  value  of  play.  According  to  the  business  organisation, 
purposeful,  playful  hands-on  learning  can  provide  all  students  with  meaningful  learning  experiences, 
being rooted in pedagogical approaches, such as project- and problem-based learning. By providing a way 
for learners to naturally engage in relevant activities, learning-through-play is stated to lead to more 
motivating and memorable educational experiences. In a similar manner, methods to ensure that students 
want to stay in and complete their education were called for by a range of OPC respondents, with one 
suggesting that teachers should be able to adapt curricula to the skill level and interests of individual 
classes or to adapt lessons according to the educational or vocational pathways  students are leaning 
towards. 

2.6. 

Additional recommended intervention measures 

Some  of  the  recommended  actions  presented  in  sections  2.3.-2.4  can  arguably  be  considered  as 
intervention  measures.  This  section  presents  exclusively  how  relevant  subsamples  of  the  OPC  survey 
prioritised among various intervention measures, whilst also containing some additional points related to 
intervention efforts that have not been discussed so far. 

Overview of survey responses regarding additional intervention measures 

For the OPC survey, educational practitioners or organisations in the field of education and training were 
asked exclusively to identify up to three intervention measures deemed to be most urgent among a list 
of  options.  Table  8  below  summarises  how  relevant  survey  subgroups  prioritised  among  a  list  of 
suggested additional intervention measures. 

Table 8: Specific intervention measures considered to be urgent (per respondent category)26 

Measures 

Individualised and qualified mentoring and tutoring 
and personalised learning approaches 

More  tailor-made,  formative,  learner-centred  and 
participatory assessment 

All practitioners and 
organisations in the 
field of education 

Teachers, 
trainers, 
educators 

Academic/ 
Research 
institution 

Non-
governmental 
organisation 
(NGO) 

45% 

35% 

47% 

42% 

38% 

46% 

59% 

38% 

26 Respondents could select up to 3 elements. Results for the free text option ‘Other measures’ are excluded from the table. Relevant 
additional  comments  received  are  instead highlighted  in  the descriptive  text.  (All  practitioners  and  organisations in  the  field of 
education, n=265; teachers, trainers, educators, n=136; academic/research institution, n=48; non-governmental organisation (NGO), 
n=30) 

38 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
Multi-disciplinary  approaches  and  cooperation  in 
and around the school (school staff, psychologists, 
social  services  and  health  professionals,  cultural 
mediators etc.) 

Developing 
the  potential  of  extra-curricular 
activities to motivate and engage pupils, including 
with cultural and sports activities 

Support 
disadvantaged children (e.g., extra resources) 

to  educational  staff  working  with 

Promoting  alternative 
learning 
methods  building  on  managing  and  enriching 
diversity in the classroom 

teaching  and 

63% 

62% 

52% 

62% 

41% 

42% 

41% 

31% 

34% 

35% 

50% 

38% 

43% 

47% 

42% 

45% 

Source: Open public consultation on the EEA initiative Pathways to School Success (2021) 

Looking at the results in the table above, teachers, trainers or educators put a stronger emphasis on more 
tailor-made,  formative,  learner-centred  and  participatory  assessment  (38 %)  and  the  promotion  of 
alternative  teaching  and  learning  methods  (47 %)  than  other  stakeholders.  Representatives  of  NGOs 
strongly  supported  the  need  for  a  more  personalised  learning  approach  through  individualised  and 
qualified mentoring and tutoring (59 %), while those representing academic, or research institutions have 
a stronger focus on the provision  of  additional  educational  staff working with disadvantaged  children 
(50 %). 

Strong emphasis on multi-disciplinary approaches 

According to practitioners or organisations in the field of education and training, two of the interventions 
that the PSS initiative should primarily focus on are multi-disciplinary approaches and cooperation in and 
around the school (school staff, psychologists, social services and health professionals, cultural mediators 
etc.)  (63%)  and  the  provision  of  Individualised  and  qualified  mentoring  and  tutoring  and  personalised 
learning approaches (45 %). 

Of the two highlighted measures, the latter was examined earlier in this report in relation to targeted 
support  measures  for  vulnerable  learners  (section  2.3.1)  as  well  as  individual  learning  plans  and 
assessments (section 2.3.2).  

In contrast, findings related to multi-disciplinary approaches and cooperation in and around school have 
not yet been presented. This intervention measure was also underlined as being important in additional 
comments to the OPC survey as well as several position papers stating that teachers and trainers should 
be  supported  in  their  work  by  social  workers,  psychologists  as  well  as  teaching  assistants.  One  OPC 
respondent recommended having social workers and psychologists placed at individual schools, arguing 
that they could help monitor progress of attending students and thus function as an early warning system 
in terms of identifying those needing additional support. Likewise, the European Trade Union Committee 
for Education (ETUCE) stated in its position paper: 

“It  is  important  to  clearly  define  the  role  of  the  teachers  and  education  support  personnel  in 
supporting children at the risk of early drop out. We require that the initiative encourage countries 
to ensure that every school has education support personnel such as psychologist and education 
counsellors  who  can  provide  targeted  support  to  children  at  risk  of  early  school  leaving  and 
underachievement  and  helps  pupils  with  mental  disorder,  depression  and  to  fight  against 
harassment  and  bullying.  A  comprehensive  support  system  for  teachers  and  other  education 
personnel,  including  leadership  in  education  institutions  is  necessary  to  implement  inclusive 
education.”  

(Source: position paper by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education) 

39 

 
As  underlined  in  the  quotation  above,  there  was  general  agreement  among  stakeholders  that  the 
collaboration of different disciplines in and around school is seen as a crucial support measure to address 
the needs of learners at risk of underachieving or leaving education and training early. 

Ensure sustainability of intervention measures and offer support by research and advisory teams  

Whilst  most  intervention  measures  recommended  in  the  OPC  and  position  papers  have  already  been 
presented, a few general comments should be added. As mentioned by one stakeholder, a key aspect of 
an intervention programme is the sustainability of its effects, meaning that teachers and schools should 
be able to use the knowledge gained from an intervention programme even after it has ended. The Cypriot 
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport and Youth recommended the involvement of a research and advisory 
team which can support teachers and school staff  in  developing intervention  programmes to improve 
school effectiveness in its position paper. Further, the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive 
Education highlighted that prevention, intervention and compensation should not be equally emphasised 
by the PSS initiative and that prevention must be prioritised more than compensation. In a similar manner, 
several stakeholders argued at the workshops that prevention should be the main focus point, since the 
objective  must  be  to  avoid  educational  exclusion  of  any  kind,  whilst  adequate  intervention  measures 
should come into play where this is not achieved. 

2.7. 

Additional recommended compensation measures 

The  proposal  for  a  Council  Recommendation  on  Pathways  to  School  Success  could  call  for  a  right  to 
individual educational support and free second chance programmes for all those who have not achieved 
a baseline level of competence or an upper secondary qualification by a certain age. This section states 
how relevant subsamples of the OPC survey prioritised among selected compensation measures, whilst 
also containing some additional points related to compensation measures. 

Overview of survey responses regarding additional compensation measures 

For  the  OPC  survey,  only  educational  practitioners  or  organisations  in  the  field  of  education  were 
prompted to select up to three possible compensation measures that they deemed most urgent among a 
list  of  options.  The  mentioned  stakeholder  subgroup  identified  primarily  the  provision  of  targeted 
individual  support  for  young  people  in  difficulties  (75 %)  and  the  provision  of  pathways  to  help  early 
leavers to go back to mainstream education (63 %) as compensation measures that should be prioritised. 
About half of the respondents identifying as either practitioners or organisations in the field of education 
and  training  recommended  recognising  and  validating  prior  learning,  including  non-formal  learning 
(49 %), whilst 43 % emphasised providing quality second chance education programmes. 

Table 9 below summarises how subsamples of the OPC survey recommended prioritising among selected 
compensation  measures.  As  the  table  shows,  there  were  no  significant  differences  between  these 
subgroups and the extent to which they highlighted specific measures. 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
Table 9: Compensation measures considered to be urgent (per respondent category)27 

Measures 

Providing  quality  second  chance  education 
programmes 

Providing  pathways  to  help  early  leavers  from 
education  and  training  to  go  back  to  mainstream 
education 

Recognising and validating prior learning, including 
competences  achieved  in  non-formal  and  informal 
learning settings 

Providing targeted individual support in mainstream 
settings,  which 
financial, 
integrates 
educational  and  psychological  support  for  young 
people in difficulties 

social, 

All practitioners 
and organisations 
in the field of 
education 

Teachers, 
trainers, 
educators 

Academic/ 
Research 
institution 

Non-
governmental 
organisation 
(NGO) 

43 % 

38 % 

40 % 

45 % 

63 % 

62 % 

63 % 

55 % 

49 % 

53 % 

50 % 

59 % 

75 % 

72 % 

81 % 

72 % 

Source: Open public consultation on the EEA initiative Pathways to School Success (2021) 

Compensation measures are to support those failed by the educational system 

At the targeted consultation workshops, it was emphasised that compensation efforts must be seen as a 
last  resort,  only  applicable  when  prevention  and  intervention  initiatives  have  failed.  Nonetheless, 
stakeholders generally agreed that students who have left education early need to be followed closely 
and  given  support.  In  several  position  papers,  for  instance,  calls  were  made  to  develop  strategies 
focussing on bringing those having left school or training early back into education. Workshop participants 
agreed that these individuals must be shown a pathway to finish their secondary education, for example 
by completing VET. One participant pointed out that Cedefop has developed different recommendations 
and  analyses  to  see  what  enabling  factors  VET  providers  can  use  to  prevent  ELET  or  help  relevant 
students to  re-enter the  educational system. Several participants  underlined that  a right to  individual 
educational support should be linked to other EU initiatives, such as individual learning accounts. 

A call was also made by workshop participants for the support and compensation of vulnerable individuals 
who,  for  example,  may  have  experienced  trauma  or  bullying.  These  also  include  individuals  not  in 
employment, education or training (NEETS). By implementing the lifelong learning approach through youth 
guarantees and strategies, vulnerable individuals may be supported in continuing or completing relevant 
education. The recommendation to compensate those who have left education early, due to bullying or 
other adverse experiences in the learning environment was also echoed by several comments to the OPC 
survey. 

Workshop participants agreed that the compensation of individuals who have left education early requires 
cooperation  between  local  actors,  such  as  schools  and  VET-providers,  as  well  as  cross-sectorial 
collaboration. In regard to helping individuals re-enter the educational system, it was emphasised that a 
focus needs to be on creating alternative places to learn and the acknowledgement that individuals may 
prefer to learn in different ways. Likewise, some OPC respondents emphasised that early leavers from 
school and training must be given alternative pathways to traditional education  building on individual 
motivations  to  learn,  whilst  not  offering  specific  examples.  However,  one  approach  taken  in  the 
Netherlands was stated in the position paper of the Dutch Ministry of Education. The Member State has 
implemented  special  pathways  allowing  early  leavers  from  education  and  trianing  to  re-enter 
conventional  education.  These  are  described  as  temporary  schemes  which  can  lead  to  certificates 

27 Respondents could select up to 3 elements. Results for the free text option ‘Other measures’ are excluded from the table. Relevant 
additional  comments  received  are  instead highlighted  in  the descriptive  text.  (All  practitioners  and  organisations in  the  field of 
education, n=265; teachers, trainers, educators, n=133; academic/research institution, n=48; non-governmental organisation (NGO), 
n=30) 

41 

 
 
                                                           
allowing participants to get reacquainted with the educational system and possibly providing them with 
motivation to aim for higher education. 

On this background, other OPC respondents highlighted that early leavers from education and training 
need to be addressed at an individual level by focusing on the specific situation and needs of each learner. 
In relation to re-integrating them into education, they should be provided with more and better options 
or alternatives and  career  guidance to  finish their education  or training.  The ability to  learn technical 
skills, the advantage of tutored libraries, the recognition of school diplomas across Europe and access to 
vocational  schools  were  named  as  specific  examples,  for  instance  by  the  World  Youth  Alliance  in  its 
position  paper.  In  addition,  a  range  of  comments  to  the  OPC  emphasised  that  the  provision  of  such 
opportunities requires adequate funding, especially when it comes to VET providers. Some respondents 
stated that VET schools in their country are poorly equipped and may struggle to provide quality education 
or training for those re-entering the educational system. 

2.8. 

Role of the EU in addressing identified obstacles and problems 

Across all conducted consultation activities, the role that the EU could play in supporting Member States 
to improve their educational systems was discussed. Findings from the OPC and stakeholder workshops 
on support measures at the EU level are presented below. 

Overview of survey responses regarding EU support to Member States 

All respondents of the OPC survey were asked to rate several areas in which the EU could offer support 
to Member States in the context of the PSS initiative according to their importance. Respondents rated 
possible  support measures  on a  scale  from 1 (’not important’) to 4 (’very  important’), and 5 (’I don´t 
know’).  

In  general,  each  suggested  EU  support  was  identified  as  either  ‘very  important’  or  ‘important’  by  the 
majority of all respondents. The same holds true when looking  across different subsamples. Typically, 
less than 10 % of all examined respondent categories deemed suggested options to be ‘not important’.  

Table 10 below  illustrates  what share of respondents  considered selected EU support  measures to be 
either ‘very important’ or ‘important’ across different subsamples. The table shows that there are few 
significant  differences  between  how  these  groups  prioritised  the  suggested  EU  support  measures. 
However, it can be noted that students/learners, parents and interested citizens generally prioritised these 
support measures to a lesser degree than the other examined subsamples. 

Table 10: Share of respondents rating EU support measures to Member States as “important” or “very 
important” (per respondent category)28 

Measures 

All 
respondents 

Students / 
learners, parents 
or interested 
citizens 

Teachers, 
trainers, 
educators 

Academic /  
research 
institutions 

Non-
governmental 
organisation  
(NGO) 

Helping disseminate good practices 

91 % 

86 % 

92 % 

96 % 

97 % 

Strengthening financial support 
through the Erasmus+ programme & 
other EU funds 

Supporting mutual learning between 
countries 

89 % 

80 % 

90 % 

88 % 

93 % 

81 % 

70 % 

84 % 

88 % 

80 % 

28  Respondents  rated  each  item  on  a  Likert  scale  from  1  (’not  important’)  to  4  (’very  important’),  and  5  (’don´t  know’).  For  an 
accessible presentation of the results, only selections of ’very important’ and ‘important’ are included. (Students/learner, parent or 
interested citizen, n=44; teachers, trainers, educators, n=136; academic/research institution, n= 48; NGO, n=30) 

42 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Providing tailor-made support for 
specific reforms/actions in Member 
States 

Supporting schools to build their 
regional and international networks 

Developing common EU tools and 
on-line resources 

Collecting data and providing 
analyses 

Providing platforms for cooperation, 
such as eTwinning 

Providing policy guidance 

81 % 

80 % 

79 % 

78 % 

73 % 

71 % 

77 % 

68 % 

75 % 

80 % 

61 % 

61 % 

85 % 

77 % 

86 % 

90 % 

89 % 

94 % 

79 % 

73 % 

79 % 

79 % 

79 % 

85 % 

83 % 

80 % 

63 % 

80 % 

70 % 

70 % 

Source: Open public consultation on the EEA initiative Pathways to School Success (2021) 

A strong call for the dissemination of good practices at the EU level 

Outcomes of the OPC survey show that 91 % of all respondents considered it to be either ‘important’ or 
‘very important’ that the EU supports the dissemination and exchange of good practices. This assessment 
was echoed in several comments by respondents stating that the exchange of good practices and the 
application of innovative approaches aimed at increasing the involvement and participation of vulnerable 
groups in education are useful tools to foster the development of an inclusive European school system. 
According  to  OPC  respondents  as  well  as  several  position  papers,  the  EU  should  support  knowledge 
transfer, for example by collating best practice examples or sharing national policy measures that have 
been proven successful or effective in some Member States.  

Regarding the dissemination of best practices, workshop participants recommended that the EU works on 
upscaling  and  mainstreaming  relevant  project  results  and  outcomes,  especially  those  from  projects 
promoting cross-sectoral collaboration. The European Commission can support these efforts, for example 
through the Working Group on Schools, which may discuss what could be important for continuous teacher 
training and share outcomes at the national, ministerial level. On this background, some OPC respondents 
commented  that  the  EU  should  promote  school  networks  on  a  European  level  and  support  joint 
educational activities by Member States. Likewise, the Dutch Ministry of Education recommended that 
already  existing  European  platforms  are  used  and  further  improved  to  facilitate  national  and 
international cooperation networks between schools as well as mutual learning. According to the ministry, 
schools could be supported in their networking efforts at system level, for instance through the Erasmus+ 
programme and other EU funds. 

Ensuring adequate funding of the educational system 

Financial support through the Erasmus+ programme and other EU funds was recognised by 89 % of all 
OPC respondents as either an ‘important’ or ‘very important’ factor. This support measure was also widely 
welcomed by stakeholders in their position papers. The European Trade Union Committee for Education 
(ETUCE), for example, stated explicitly that the PSS initiative should encourage Member States to ensure 
sustainable  national  public  investment  in  education  as  an  essential  prerequisite  to  prevent  ELET  and 
underachievement. In addition, public funding should also be made available to ensure equal access to 
digital  infrastructures,  especially  since  the  Covid-19  crisis  has  exacerbated  the  digital  divide  between 
some disadvantaged groups of learners and their  peers. ETUCE therefore welcomed the Commission’s 
plans that the European Semester process will provide relevant targeted recommendations to  Member 
States and that EU funds (Erasmus, ESF+, RRF) will provide further support. 

Likewise, the European Federation of Education Employers (EFEE) stated: 

43 

 
 
 
“…we encourage the Commission  to  outline  the  importance of the coherence of  already existing 
financial mechanisms such as the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, 
European  Agricultural  Fund  for  Rural  Development,  the  Asylum,  Migration  and  Integration  Fund, 
Recovery and Resilience Facility and to ensure an adequate distribution of these funds on a need-
based approach.”  

(Source: OPC position paper) 

The organisation also pointed out that such an approach would make a crucial contribution to   decoupling 
the geographical location of a school from its ability to provide qualitative and  inclusive education for 
every learner. Schools in rural areas, for instance, struggle more frequently than urban schools to provide 
quality education,  since the aforementioned often are  geographically isolated and small  in size which 
increases the risk for insufficient infrastructure and a lack of experienced teachers. On the basis of the 
European Pillar of Social Rights, the EU could promote a distribution of funds that helps to address this 
issue. 

Supporting exchange programmes 

A few of the additional comments provided by OPC respondents stated that the EU could help increase 
the  motivation  of  learners  by  further  promoting  the  exchange  of  pupils  across  Europe.  For  different 
reasons, namely the exchange of experience and practice, other respondents suggested that teachers to 
a  greater  extent  should  be  supported  in  participating  in  exchange  programs.  According  to  workshop 
participants,  the  EU  should  generally  increase  its  efforts  to  promote  the  ongoing  professional 
development of teachers and educators. However, stakeholders at the workshops also recognised that 
the EU already supports such efforts, for example through Erasmus+ teacher academies. 

Promoting European monitoring standards 

Additionally, consulted stakeholders recommended that the EU supports enhanced monitoring activities, 
which according to OPC outcomes are to be prioritised by the PSS initiative. At the stakeholder workshops, 
participants highlighted different obstacles for monitoring the progress of individual learners as well as 
schools  or  national  education  systems.  These  obstacles  included  privacy  concerns  related  to  personal 
data on students and a need to establish trust amongst all stakeholders for conducting such activities. 
The EU could help address those issues by developing recommendations on the appropriate handling of 
data  as  well  as  suggesting  systematic  monitoring  approaches  and  stimulating  the  development  of 
appropriate  tools.  Additionally,  the  EU  could  help  establish  evidence  registers  for  the  comparison  of 
national approaches.  

The  European  Federation  of  Education  Employers  (EFEE)  pointed  out  that  collecting  data  alone  is  not 
enough to tackle underachievement and ELET. Therefore, the PSS initiative should strengthen the dialogue 
between  employers,  school  leaders  and  others  at  all  levels  of  governance  to  establish  trust  and 
transparency through long-term dialogue. According to the federation, these factors will lead to enhanced 
peer learning and exchange of best practices when it comes to  developing common standards for the 
collection and evaluation of data at the local, regional and national level. 

Ensuring policy coherence of the PSS initiative 

Last but not least, several stakeholders called for policy coherence, recommending that the PSS initiative 
should be clearly linked to other EU frameworks.  Position papers by Eurochild and the First Years  Firs 
Priority  campaign,  for  instance,    named  the  newly  adopted  Recommendation  establishing  a  European 
Child Guarantee as well as the new EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child and the Pillar of Social Rights 
Action Plan as specific examples that can provide incentives and guidance for Member States to increase 

44 

 
 
 
 
public investment and support for accessible and inclusive education, including the promotion of the social 
and emotional well-being of students. 

Likewise, a workshop participant argued that the PSS initiative should bridge and refer to all relevant EU 
initiatives, such as the European Education Area and lifelong learning strategies. Further, the World Youth 
Alliance (WYA) argued in its position paper that the European Youth Goals as well as the EU's Lifelong 
Learning  Programme  with  its  four  sub-programmes  (Comenius,  Erasmus,  Leonardo  da  Vinci  and 
Grundtvig) should be taken into consideration.  

As part of the effort to decouple school success from the socio-economic background of learners, the 
European Union of School Student Unions (OBESSU) called upon the EU to accompany the PSS initiative 
with concrete welfare measures for learners, including the provision of free transportation, free learning 
equipment as well as access to spaces for studying and libraries. The student union further recommended 
binding measures within the new Pact on Migration and Asylum to ensure that all learners, and especially 
minors having migrated either accompanied or unaccompanied, are granted access to education on the 
same grounds as national citizens. 

45