MOVIBES

by Simon Normandeau
Statistician, Directorate for Education and Skills

by Stuart W. Elliott
U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine


New technologies tend to shift jobs and skills. New technologies bring new products, which shift jobs across occupations: with the arrival of cars, the economy needed more assembly line workers and fewer blacksmiths. New technologies also bring new work processes, which shift skills in jobs: with the arrival of copiers, office workers needed to replace ink cartridges but not use carbon paper. Economic history is full of examples of new technologies causing such shifts.

Workers often worry that new technologies will destroy old jobs without creating new ones. However, economic history suggests that job destruction and creation have always gone together, with a shift in jobs and skills that leaves most people still employed.

Will artificial intelligence (AI) differ from past technologies in the way it shifts jobs and skills? To answer that question, we need to know which skills will be supplied by AI and which will be left for people. If workers have the skills AI lacks, they will be able to find new jobs if AI automates their old jobs. In that case, AI will shift jobs and skills just like previous technologies. However, if workers do not have the skills AI lacks, these shifts will break down and the institution of work itself will be threatened.

As an example, consider literacy and numeracy. These skills are widely used in many jobs—so widely used that countries invest many years of formal education to help everyone develop them. The OECD assesses these skills in its Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) because they are so important for work and education.

A new OECD study uses PIAAC to assess whether AI can perform these skills as well. The study is only exploratory, but its results are sobering. Current AI techniques are close to allowing computers to perform at Level 3 on the 5-level scale in literacy and numeracy—at or above the proficiency of 89% of adults in OECD countries. Only 11% of adults are above the level that AI is close to reproducing.

If literacy and numeracy were the only work skills, this new study would suggest that AI is not like other technologies. As current AI techniques are applied, many workers with moderate proficiency in literacy and numeracy would be displaced and would not have the higher-level skills for the jobs that remain. The usual shift of workers between jobs and skills would break down.

Of course, if this happened, we would need to improve education. The results of the Survey of Adult Skills show what might be possible. For adults with tertiary education, 21% are above the computer level in literacy and 23% are above the computer level in numeracy. And in the highest performing countries, these percentages for adults with tertiary education reach 37% in literacy and 36% in numeracy, for Japan and Sweden, respectively. These results are much better than the current OECD average of 11%.

With high-quality tertiary education, many more adults could develop literacy and numeracy skills above the current computer level. However, there would still be a serious problem if literacy and numeracy were the only work skills even with high-quality tertiary education for everyone. We do not have examples of education policies at scale that bring 80% or even 50% of adults above the current computer level.

Fortunately, literacy and numeracy are not the only work skills. There are many more skills that are important for work than the ones measured by PIAAC. Many jobs involve tasks using expert knowledge like scientific reasoning. Many jobs involve physical tasks like cooking. Many jobs involve social tasks like conversation.

PIAAC does not measure the other skills needed for such tasks and cannot tell us how AI might perform on them. However, computer scientists are developing AI to reproduce these other skills as well. Do AI’s capabilities in these other skills look as proficient as their capabilities in literacy and numeracy? We do not know.

The new study using PIAAC to assess AI in literacy and numeracy is only a first step. The OECD is working with the U.S. National Academies to develop a new programme to assess AI capabilities across all work skills. In the years ahead, policymakers will need this information to know whether AI will shift jobs and skills just like other technologies have done in the past—or whether this time is different.
Links
Computers and the Future of Skill Demand
Skills Matter: Further Results from the Survey of Adult Skills
Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC)
Follow the conversation on Twitter: #AI and #GoingDigital

Photo credit: @Shutterstock

by Andreas Schleicher
Director, Directorate for Education and Skills


Anyone flying into Abu Dhabi or Dubai is amazed how the United Arab Emirates has been able to transform its oil and gas into shiny buildings and a bustling economy. But more recently, the country is discovering that far greater wealth than all the oil and gas together lies hidden among its people. If the country would live up to its ambition to be among the world’s 20 leading school systems, as measured by PISA, that would add over USD 5 600 billion to the economy over the lifetime of today’s primary school students, or the equivalent of 9 times the size of the UAE’s economy. That is because people with a solid foundation of knowledge, with creative, problem-solving and collaborative skills, and with character qualities such as mindfulness, curiosity, courage and resilience, make a so much greater contribution to economic and social progress.

The trouble is that the UAE has been slow to invest in the people who can dig up and develop that new wealth: highly effective and creative teachers. That might be about to change. On 7 October, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan invited over 800 teachers from around the world to the first Qudwa Global Teachers’ Forum to reimagine the profession. It was the first such event where the talk wasn’t just about teachers, but where teachers talked about how they can prepare today’s students for their future, rather than for our past. In what was dubbed the “ask’ track of the event, teachers explored the future of teaching and the design of innovative learning environments. The “advance” track featured amazing role models for tomorrow’s teachers. And in the “share” track, teachers exchanged views on innovative practices.

For a start, teachers drew up a job description for the profession far bolder than what governments typically come up with. Of course, teachers need to have a deep understanding of what they teach and whom they teach, because what teachers know and care about makes such a difference to student learning. But Qudwa also expects teachers to be passionate, compassionate and thoughtful; to encourage students’ engagement and responsibility; to respond effectively to students of different needs, backgrounds and languages; to provide continual assessments of students and meaningful feedback; to promote collaborative learning, tolerance and social cohesion; and to ensure that students feel valued and included. And it expects teachers themselves to collaborate and work in teams, and with other schools and parents, in order to advance their profession.

Most of the teachers at the Qudwa forum acknowledged there was even more involved than this. Successful people generally had a teacher who was a mentor and took a real interest in their life and aspirations, who helped them understand who they are, and revealed their passions and how to build on their strengths. These were teachers who instilled a love of learning and taught them how to build effective learning strategies, and who helped them discover where they can make a difference to social progress.

Put all of this together and it seems teachers would have every reason to ask for much better pay to meet those expectations. But I heard no one at the forum saying they need more money before they can make a start. That is quite remarkable, because that’s usually the killer argument with which we pass responsibility on to someone else. Instead, the event offered many promising answers for how teachers can meet incredible expectations.

Teachers’ commitment to helping all learners

What impressed me most was the participants’ deep commitment to equity, to do whatever it takes to leverage the talent of every learner. That came across in many ways. First, in the belief that every student can learn, and the importance of embracing diversity in learning with differentiated approaches to teaching. This means building instruction from students’ passions and capacities, helping students personalise their learning and assessments in ways that foster engagement and talents, and encouraging students to be ingenious. As Aggeliki Pappa, a teacher from Greece, put it: “We need to break down the belief that some students cannot learn or are disabled. Students are just differently abled.”

It also came through in the way in which so many of these teachers are addressing social disadvantage, even in the most difficult circumstances. Children from privileged backgrounds will always find open doors in life, but those from disadvantaged backgrounds have only one card to play, and that is to meet a teacher like those at the Qudwa forum and get a good education. If they miss that boat, often there will be no second chance for them. And how we treat the most vulnerable students reflects who we are. I remember Manil Maharjan, a teacher from Nepal, saying, “When students can see a positive future, that’s when can concentrate on their present.” Or Jacque Kahura, from Kenya, who noted: “If we understand these students and their life and their background, then we can fill the multiple roles they need.” At the global level too, the world is no longer divided between countries that are rich and well-educated and those that are poor and badly educated. Countries can choose to develop a superior education system, and if they succeed it will yield huge rewards.

Third, teachers’ commitment to equity came through in how participants at the Qudwa forum embraced learning science and pedagogical innovation. This is about how teachers and schools can better recognise that students learn differently, and give students more ownership over the time, place, path and pace of learning. As Niall McGonigle, from the UAE, put it: “No matter what you're teaching, there's always a way to involve children in the process.” Parveen Jaleel, another teacher from the UAE, added: “Just put the child in the centre and ignore everything else.”

I was also impressed by teachers’ commitment to their profession beyond the role they play in the classroom. These teachers saw themselves as learners with a growth mindset, and as contributing collaboratively to system leadership. As Richard Spencer, from the United Kingdom, noted: “Great teachers are great learners and students need to see their teachers learning.” The heart of this is working with a high degree of professional autonomy and in a collaborative culture. As Souad Belcaid, from Morrocco, noted: “Don’t be afraid of feedback”; and Eldijana Bjelcic, from the United States, added pointedly: “All feedback requires trust between provider and recipients.”

We heard how teacher development must be viewed in terms of lifelong learning, with initial teacher education conceived as providing the foundation for ongoing learning, rather than producing ready-made professionals. And teachers explained how many of them are already engaged in research as an integral part of what it means to be a professional teacher.

Responding to a rapidly changing world

The sharing session also exposed many examples of how digital technology can leverage great teaching, even if it will never replace poor teaching. What if we could get teachers around the globe working on curated crowd-sourcing of the best educational practices, making the Qudwa forum a permanent institution? Technology could create a giant open-source community of teachers and unlock the creative skills and initiative of all teachers, simply by tapping into the desire of people like you to contribute, collaborate and be recognised for it. I remember Paul Solarz saying: “I've been teaching for 19 years. I was one of the most reluctant technology users. But now my students are my partners in bringing technology into the classroom.”

But the heart of this is not technology; it is ownership. As Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah mentioned at the opening, while learning will become more digital, teaching remains a deeply human activity, based on trust and passion. As I could see at the forum, when teachers feel a sense of ownership over their classrooms, when students feel a sense of ownership over their learning, that is when productive learning takes place. So the answer is to strengthen trust, transparency, professional autonomy and the collaborative culture of the profession all at the same time.

But the most central reason why teachers’ ownership of the profession is a must-have rather than an optional extra lies in the pace of change in school systems. Even the most effective attempts to push a government-established curriculum into classroom practice will drag out over a decade, because it just takes so much time to communicate the goals and methods through the different layers of the system and to build them into traditional methods of teacher education. In this age of accelerations, such a slow process is no longer good enough and inevitably leads to a widening gap between what students need to learn and what teachers teach. When fast gets really fast, being slow to adapt makes us really slow.

The only way to shorten that pipeline is for teachers themselves to be involved in the design of curricula and the pedagogies to enact and enable 21st-century curricula. As many teachers said, subject-matter knowledge will be less and less the core and more and more the context of good teaching. Twenty-first century education is about helping children develop a reliable compass and the navigation tools to find their own way through our increasingly complex, uncertain, ambiguous and volatile world. While governments can establish directions and curriculum goals, teachers need to take charge of the instructional system.

In the past, the policy focus was on providing education; tomorrow it needs to be on outcomes, shifting from looking upwards in the bureaucracy towards looking outwards to the next teacher, the next school and the next education system. In the past, administrations emphasised school management; tomorrow the focus needs to be on instructional leadership, with leaders supporting, evaluating and developing high-quality teachers and designing innovative learning environments. As Armand Doucet, from Canada, said:  “We need administrators who are leaders and who understand that teachers need to do innovative things to get through to students.” Over dinner with a group of teachers from the Varkey Global Teacher Prize community, we talked about how assessments and accountability need to evolve, too, as school systems advance, and as rules become guidelines and good practice, and ultimately, as good practice becomes culture.

The Qudwa forum showed how effective learning environments constantly create synergies and find new ways to enhance professional, social and cultural capital with others. They do that with families and communities, with higher education, with other schools and learning environments, and with businesses. Participants heard how building trust between a teacher and parents requires regular and open communication. It also means creating places where parents, children and teachers don’t just talk but do things together. This might be something as simple as having breakfast together, which happens in Nablus, or more structured activities, like the innovative Maker Space in Bulgaria. As Anika Mir, from the UAE, put it: “Parents can be our assets and our allies as teachers”; and Stephen Ritz said: “We need to push the walls of the classroom out and bring the community in.”

I was also struck by how deeply participants engaged in imagining the role of teachers for tomorrow. The past was constructed on divisions, with teachers and content divided by subjects and students separated by expectations of their future career prospects. The Qudwa forum showed how the future needs to be integrated, with an emphasis on merging subjects and combining students. It also needs to be connected, so that learning is open to the rich resources in the community. Those participants who joined Ger Graus from Kidzania saw how we can raise and widen horizons if we can better integrate the world of schooling with real life. Also Soonufat Supramaniam, a teacher from Malaysia, showed participants how much can be achieved by inviting people from different areas and careers to come to schools and discuss their careers.

Instruction in the past was subject-based; instruction in the future needs to be more project-based. It needs to build experiences that help students think across the boundaries of subject-matter disciplines. The past was hierarchical; the future is collaborative, recognising both teachers and students as resources and co-creators. In the past, schools were technological islands, with technology often limited to supporting existing practices, and students always outpacing schools in their adoption of technology. Now schools need to harness the potential of technologies to liberate learning from past conventions and connect learners in new and powerful ways, with new sources of knowledge and with one another.

Tomorrow begins now

All that will have profound implications for the work organisations of schools. The past was about prescription; the future is about an informed profession, where professional and collaborative working norms replace the industrial work organisation, with its administrative control and accountability. Professionalism means emphasising the internal motivation of members and their ownership of professional practice. That demands public confidence in professionals and the profession, professional preparation and learning, collective ownership of professional practice, and acceptance of professional responsibility in the name of the profession. With all of that, tomorrow’s teachers will enjoy deep professional knowledge, a high degree of professional autonomy, and a collaborative culture.

The challenge is that such transformation cannot be mandated by government, which leads to surface compliance, nor can it be built solely from the ground up. Education needs to become better at identifying and championing key agents of change, and better at finding more effective approaches for scaling up and spreading innovation. That is also about finding better ways to recognise, reward and celebrate success, to do whatever is possible to make it easier for innovators to take risks and encourage the emergence of new ideas. Education needs less virtual reform and more real change.

None of this is easy; none of it will be done overnight. And the status quo will always have many protectors. But that’s no reason to give up on education as the most powerful tool for building a fairer, more humane and more inclusive world.

Knowledge and skills have become the global currency of 21st-century economies. But there is no central bank that prints this currency; we cannot inherit this currency, and we cannot produce it through speculation. We can only develop it through sustained effort and investment by people and for people. And no school system can achieve that without attracting, developing and sustaining great teaching talent.

Last but not least, everyone took the theme of the event, “teaching for tomorrow”, literally. What made this Qudwa forum special for me was that it was not about the day after tomorrow, the next year or the next life, but about what everyone can introduce into their daily work tomorrow – literally. The UAE should be credited for offering such an amazing platform to work together on this globally. As Sean Bellamy said: “If the education system is diseased, then the Qudwa has gathered the cure here under one roof.” And perhaps that outward-looking perspective will turn out to become the key differentiator for seeing progress in education. The division may be between those schools and education systems that feel threatened by alternative ways of thinking and those that are open to the world and ready to learn from the world’s best experiences.

Links
Qudwa Global Teachers’ Forum

Photo credit: Qudwa 2017

by Tracey Burns
Senior Analyst, Directorate for Education and Skills


Feeling out of place. Too big, too short, too wise, too ignorant – these are all situations Gulliver experiences in Jonathan Swift’s classic of English literature. Gulliver’s Travels give us an idea of how important our environment is when it comes to defining ourselves. It also gives us a 19th century look into the very modern concept of diversity.

Diversity in the classroom includes differences in the way students' brains learn, or neurodiversity. Diagnoses of neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD) have risen dramatically in the last two decades. This is not an issue that is isolated to a few countries: ADHD diagnoses have increased dramatically in Brazil, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Similar patterns are seen in the prevalence of ASD, which occurs along a spectrum of severity and includes Asperger syndrome, a condition some have argued Swift experienced himself. Children with ASD tend to have difficulty with social interaction, dealing with change, and flexible thinking. Cognitive abilities of children with ASD can range from gifted to severely challenged. Stigmas attached to the diagnosis in some countries can result in under identification; for example, two-thirds of ASD cases identified in a Korean sample when diagnostic assessments were administered were otherwise undiagnosed and untreated.

A new Trends Shaping Education Spotlight looks at how education systems work to meet the needs of these students and ensure that all types of learners thrive at school and beyond. There is a growing trend towards all children having the right to be included in typical classrooms if the families so choose (i.e. inclusive education). Inclusive education can help neurodiverse students develop social skills that can encourage social integration and friendships with their peers. It can also help dispel myths: for example, in a survey conducted in the United States, 43% of participants believed wrongly that learning disabilities are correlated with IQ.

In order to deliver on the promise of inclusive education, teachers need support. In many countries teachers now commonly have classes with a diverse range of learning preferences and abilities, including children with different cognitive abilities, hyperactivity, and emotional difficulties. Many teachers feel inadequately prepared for this: in the last two versions of the TALIS survey, teachers consistently identified teaching students with special needs as their first need for professional development (teachers were not asked specifically about neurodiverse students). Student behaviour and classroom management were identified as their third professional need. In addition to supporting teachers, one of the other big challenges is assessing neurodiverse students. Standardised tests are not designed for neurodiverse students, and comparing scores – even with modified questions – may not be appropriate.

On the other hand, assessments reinforce the fact that: 1) academic learning is not secondary for neurodiverse students; 2) it is appropriate to have academic goals for these children, as for all children; and 3) monitoring outcomes for neurodiverse students can help keep systems accountable for achieving learning gains for all.

Small changes, for example alterations of structure and time, can help ADHD students who may find it difficult to sit for long periods. For students with ASD, nonverbal intelligence assessment could be considered, along with other adaptive measures such as taking the test in a quiet room alone.

On a system level, one important concern to take into account is the impact of a competitive test culture on identifying which students are considered neurodiverse: when stakes are high in school assessment, teachers and schools may try to intentionally leave low-performing “neurotypical” students out of the test population by classifying them as “special needs". This is the case, for example, in the United States: in states that have passed laws that tie funding to results on standardised testing, the rates of ADHD diagnosis have also been rapidly increasing. Despite the challenges, avoiding assessment is not a solution: if educational methods are to improve, there first needs to be more evaluation of programmes and evidence-informed practices to support neurodiverse students.

Being able to embrace diversity in all its forms is a key aspect of life in the 21st century. Thankfully, the voyages of Gulliver – in which the traveller who "isn't like the others" is tied up or otherwise mistreated/misunderstood – are long gone. But more can still be done to help our education systems ensure that all types of learners thrive. In order to make that happen, we need to support our teachers and learners, and take a hard look at how the system as a whole operates.

Links
Trends Shaping Education Spotlight No. 12: Neurodiversity in Education
Trends Shaping Education 2016
Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) 
New Insights from TALIS 2013

Personalising Education

Join us on Edmodo

by Andreas Schleicher
Director, Directorate for Education and Skills


I’ve often said that the quality of an education system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers. How, then, do teachers become really good at their jobs? One important way is by learning from one another – across classes, across schools, and yes, even across countries. That’s why the OECD is a knowledge partner of the 2017 Qudwa Global Teachers’ Forum, which is being held in Abu Dhabi on 7 and 8 October. The Forum is bringing together more than 900 teachers from 83 countries to discuss “Teaching for Tomorrow”.

The focus of the forum couldn’t be more timely. According to reports by the World Economic Forum, one-third of the skillsets required to perform today’s jobs will be entirely redundant by 2020. And experts assert that nearly two-thirds of children entering primary school today will end up working in jobs that do not yet exist. The dilemma for teachers is that the kinds of things that are easiest to teach and easiest to test, are precisely the things that are also easy to digitise, automate and outsource. If we want to educate students for their future, rather than for our past, we need to better understand the future and what it implies for teaching today.

“Qudwa” is the Arabic word for “role model”. Teachers are role models for their students, and they can also be leaders in their communities. They need to learn how best to prepare children for living and working in this new, highly digitised world so that tomorrow’s communities are cohesive and productive. We know so much more about what makes for effective teaching; and we now have the tools to amplify and share this knowledge so that we can develop a global network of change leaders.

Participants at the forum will be sharing information and exchanging their views about the most effective teaching strategies, using technology in the classroom, making schools more inclusive, and engaging with parents, among many other topics. Most of the discussions will be based on data collected by the OECD: a strong foundation on which a high-quality teaching force – and thus high-quality education systems – can be built. Like all of us, teachers need inspiration to perform at their best; I’m certain they will find lots of it in Abu Dhabi this weekend.

by Dirk Van Damme 
Head of the Skills Beyond School Division,  Directorate for Education and Skills


Since Harvard economists Goldin & Katz published their ground-breaking book The Race between Technology and Education (2008), education has come face-to-face with the challenges of a world continuously altered by technological innovation. Education is generally perceived to be a laggard social system, better equipped to transmit the heritage of the past than to prepare for the future. This perception is not entirely accurate; OECD/CERI work on Measuring innovation in education (2014) demonstrates that education is a system that is not change-averse.

From a historical perspective, education has adjusted to the needs and opportunities of the 2nd Industrial Revolution, for example by introducing natural sciences into the curriculum – although it took many years for that to happen. Will education have the luxury of time to confront the current wave of technological change and innovation? How will it react to the challenges of digitalization and artificial intelligence?

On 25-26 September some hundred education policy makers from national governments and international organisations and representatives from the emerging education industry gathered at the 3rd Global Education Industry Summit (GEIS) in Luxembourg to discuss these questions. Jointly organised by the OECD, the European Commission and Luxembourg, the GEIS aspired to be a platform for discussions on how education can embrace innovation and how the education industry can be involved in that endeavour. This year the focus of the event was on opening up education, with the title Schools at the crossroads of innovation in cities and regions. A background report with the same title provided the substantive materials to support the discussions: it suggests that schools need to  reach out  to regional economies and local communities to be part of innovation ecosystems in order to contribute with knowledge and learning opportunities, but also to get incentivised to become more innovative themselves.

One of the most visible outcomes of the discussions was that education policy makers and industrialists are not yet on the same page. While the latter forcefully argued for a sense of urgency and more drastic changes, the former made a case for piecemeal engineering of a very complicated system. Some participants concerned with the economics of education argued that innovation will become a systemic imperative, driven by the exploding cost of current models. Over time PISA scores remain rather flat, while the cost of education is increasing. “You can’t keep squeezing the model; you need to change the production function”. But education policy makers argued that education needs to be inclusive, taking into account not only the innovation pioneers but many other stakeholders as well.

Part of the discussion was about what we exactly mean with ‘innovation’. Spectacular changes at the frontier of scientific discovery and technological inventions attract of lot of attention. But in broader definitions, such as the one adopted by the OECD Innovation Strategy, innovation is not only about the latest state-of-the-art disruptive technologies, but also about the breadth of societal changes, including social innovation. Innovation is also about the knowledge and skills that make societies future-proof, including capacities and capabilities for using, integrating, accepting novel solutions to challenges.

Some representatives from innovative schools were invited to the Summit to share their views and experiences. Some of them convincingly argued for greater diversification, moving away from the standardization and uniformity that has characterised education’s solutions to the challenge of the 2nd Industrial Revolution and its demand for mass education. In the past standardisation was the easy answer to the increasing need  of access and equity, but the future will require education to implement systemic diversification to meet very different economic and social needs and to provide opportunities to very different talents.

On how schools should progress, education industry representatives applauded the call for schools to open up and become partners in innovation ecosystems in regional economies and societies. Networking and connecting schools with business and local communities will be essential drivers of innovation in education; opening up is the best strategy to address change and connect schools with what’s happening in the outside world.  Industry representatives recognised that this would involve more risk-taking by schools, but that’s what is expected from all social systems in a period of rapid transformation. The status-quo is not an option, and not risk-free either.

Opening up education to businesses was, however, an idea that provoked a rather strong reaction from the side of Education International, the representative of teacher unions, against the dangers of commodification and privatization of education. Employers can play a role in education, but education works for the greater public good and should not be submitted to the economic interests of for-profit actors. Others argued that innovation will never endanger the critically important role of teachers, quite  the contrary. Innovation-proof education systems will have to rely on a very strong, mature profession. But the teaching profession will have to move away from an industrial model to a professional model. We need to take a giant leap forward in the process of professionalization of teachers.

In the end there was an idea on which all participants agreed: the critical role of governments to steer innovation in education. Increasing school autonomy, decentralisation, complexity and technological disruption make the task of governing education systems more difficult, but also move the governance challenge to a higher level, that of leadership in a period of change. Democratic government is and will be the system through which change and innovation in education will happen. But this will only be possible by empowering schools and supporting those that promote innovation.

Links