Why we should care more about who our future teachers will be

By Noémie Le Donné
Analyst, Directorate for Education and Skills

Image credit: Education and Employers, "Drawing the Future"

“What would you like to be when you grow up?” is not only an adult’s favourite icebreaker when speaking with children – it's also a key consideration for policy makers who truly care about students’ futures. This is especially true when the answer to the question is: “I want to be a teacher.”

Faced with teacher shortages, recruitment challenges, and concerns about the social standing of the teaching profession, policy makers need to design strategies to attract more, better-qualified candidates to the teaching profession. But before doing that, they need to know who tomorrow’s teachers might be.

In 2015, the PISA survey asked 15-year-old students the following forward-looking question: “What kind of job do you expect to have when you are about 30 years old?” Our new report, Effective Teacher Policies: Insights from PISA, reveals some enlightening findings.

On average across OECD countries, about 4.4% of 15-year-old students expect to work as teachers. By comparison, the number of teachers in primary, lower secondary and upper secondary education represents about 2.4% of the labour force across OECD countries. This means that the share of students expecting a teaching career is generally larger than the share of working-age people who are actually teaching today.

This suggests that education systems could do more to encourage students to pursue a career in teaching. Teaching’s initial popularity among school-age children is not that surprising considering that the profession, like healthcare, enjoys one clear advantage over other occupations: all 15-year-olds know that this occupation exists. They have all had some contact with teachers, and they have at least a general idea of what they do and what their working conditions are like.

The more an education system is able to raise the skills of its students, the more likely it is to create future generations of highly skilled teachers.

At the same time, about 46% of students in OECD countries expect to pursue a career as some other type of non-teaching professional: high-status jobs that typically require a university degree, such as doctors and lawyers. Yet in many countries, students who expect to work as teachers have poorer mathematics and reading skills than those who expect to work in these other professions.

Interestingly, the skill gap between students who expect a career in teaching and those who expect a career as professionals tends to be larger in low-performing countries. In other words, there seems to be an opportunity for a virtuous cycle: highly skilled teachers are needed to meet the challenge of educating future generations, while also attracting more motivated candidates to the profession. At the same time, the more an education system is able to raise the skills of its students, the more likely it is to create future generations of highly skilled teachers.

School systems often aim to recruit their teachers out of the same pool from which all of the top professionals are recruited. But people who see themselves as candidates for those professions, and are attracted to the working conditions enjoyed by professionals, might not find what they’re looking for in schools that use an overly bureaucratic management structure to direct teachers’ work.

Transforming the work organisation of schools, involving teachers in school decision making and enhancing their leadership responsibilities are at least as important as increasing teacher salaries. Media campaigns to enhance the image of the profession – by highlighting its importance for the nation, its sophistication and complexity, and the intellectual excitement it can generate – can also be a great help.

“What would you like to be when you grow up?” is no throwaway question. The answers are symptomatic of the virtuous or vicious nature of the education cycle in a given system. So what can policy makers do to enter or pursue a virtuous cycle? Our new report on effective teacher policies discusses this and recommends important levers for promoting teaching as a demanding, rewarding and fulfilling profession.


Learn more

• Teaching in Focus #22: Who wants to become a teacher and why?
• Effective Teacher Policies: Insights from PISA

How can technology support teaching and learning more effectively?

By Marc Fuster Rabella
Consultant, Directorate for Education and Skills

Photo credit: John Schnobrich/Unsplash

When Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press in the 15th century, it marked one of the most revolutionary technological developments in human history. Gutenberg’s invention allowed for the universalisation of knowledge and the rapid spread of new ideas. However, whenever an artefact serves to disseminate both good and bad ideas alike, it cannot be considered an absolute benefit.

For better or worse, technology intervenes in most, if not all aspects of our lives. When it comes to the link between education and technology, there are at least two important considerations to make. How can schools and teachers help students improve the outcomes of their use of technology? What are the ways in which technology can support teaching and learning more effectively? We address these and related questions in our latest Trends Shaping Education Spotlight.

The first question revolves around what students should learn in a world that is increasingly influenced by technology. A common response consists in focusing on STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths). This makes sense from a labour market perspective, considering the current and projected growth of sectors such as biotechnology, computer science and software, renewable energy or medical and personal care. Yet a narrow focus on STEM learning may not be enough.

There are multiple paths to STEM occupations that don’t require qualifications in STEM; and even the most technologically advanced industries require workers with strong mixes of skills, including social and emotional skills, and multilingual and multicultural competencies. Addressing gender-based prejudices and stereotypes is a particularly crucial issue, as these prevent many girls and women from engaging in STEM education and careers.

When thinking about the future of work, it is important to bear in mind that current students might be preparing for jobs that do not even exist yet. OECD projections show that in less than a decade, computers will be capable of performing tasks carried out daily by more than 50% of today’s workforce. We must therefore pay greater attention to life-long learning and rethink the links between education and work, in order to articulate a whole-of-society effort that guarantees access to skilling, up-skilling and re skilling opportunities.

A number of issues related to personal and social development emerge in a heavily digitised world, as well. Technology creates opportunities and risks alike. For example, wider access to information eases learning, but it also enables the spread of low-quality and unreliable information. The use of social media makes it easier to connect with friends at any time, yet it simultaneously exposes a great deal of personal data to unwarranted use, and facilitates more pervasive forms of bullying and harassment.

Students across OECD countries need to develop resilience to these risks. It is important to support their engagement in and motivation towards positive ICT uses, and their development of strong digital skills. Enabling strategies, rather than bans and limitations, is the most effective way for students to deal with risks both at home and at school. Fairness is a key consideration here, as schools might have to compensate for students who do not receive such support at home.

Apart from education on using technology, how can education systems harness technology to improve teaching and learning? Adaptive learning systems are one example of impressive advances in so-called “edTech” applications. Increasingly reliant on big data, these systems support students in managing their own learning experiences with more autonomy, and free up time for teachers to better plan, prepare and develop classroom activities.

Another example is the use of increasingly sophisticated virtual environments such as games, simulations and virtual worlds. These provide low-cost opportunities for more situated and collaborative learning, sometimes where they did not exist before – think of home-schooled children accessing virtual labs through virtual reality devices.

Despite the inherent potential of such technologies, putting them to work depends on finding the right interplay among the different elements that influence student learning. These include learning goals, available technologies, students’ prior knowledge and learning needs, and the context in which teaching and learning develop.

In this respect, different forms of ICT use, digital skills and attitudes towards technology are as important for students as they are for teachers. Using technology effectively in the classroom requires teachers to have access to training, practice and peer collaboration, in order for them to coherently integrate  integrate content, technological and pedagogical knowledge.

Ultimately, technology reflects and even amplifies what happens in everyday life – whether  in our personal, professional or civic capacities. Positive technology use is built on skilled users who anchor their practice in ethical attitudes and behaviours, and education has a lot to say about that. As the technology philosopher Jaron Lanier says about the printing press, “people, not machines, made the Renaissance”.

Learn more: 

• Trends Shaping Education Spotlight 15
• OECD Skills Outlook 2017
• Computers and the Future of Skill Demand 
• Teaching for the Future: Effective Practices to Transform Education
• Teachers as Designers of Learning Environments

Improving learning spaces by empowering school users

By Andreas Schleicher
Director, Directorate for Education and Skills

During a trip to Finland in the middle of winter, I visited a school where all the students left their snow boots in the school lobby and walked around in their socks for the rest of the day. I had a similar experience in New Zealand, where barefoot students are a common sight in warmer months. In each case, the students clearly felt as comfortable in their schools as they would in their living rooms. While fundamental, we need to do more than just ensure the comfort and safety of students in schools. The bigger challenge is to foster an effective learning environment that supports students in building the portfolio of knowledge and skills they will need to thrive in the 21st century.

When visiting schools all over the world, I’ve witnessed many instances of students and teachers re-arranging their physical environment – both inside and outside school buildings – to suit their learning objectives and teaching practices. In some cases, the school building and its grounds had clearly been designed to be responsive to changing user requirements. Too often, though, it was apparent that the needs of students, teachers, staff and school leaders were simply an afterthought.

The potential impact of user-centred design is substantial if we pause to consider that by the time students in OECD countries reach 15 years-old, they will have spent on average over 7,500 hours inside a school building. The same holds true for their teachers and school leaders who are regularly obliged to adapt to existing layouts in schools, rather than being empowered to actively shape them.

We often overlook the importance of building and renovating physical learning spaces in a way that positively supports –  rather than actively impedes – the introduction of innovative pedagogy, curricula and technologies.

Schools are more than just places of learning for children – they are workplaces, too.

Schools are more than just places of learning for children – they are workplaces, too. The adults who breathe life into a school building and have chosen to spend their careers building a vibrant learning community within its walls are under increasing pressure to meet ever-rising expectations from parents, school districts and society at large. Responding adequately will require the teaching profession to devote more time to peer-learning, mentoring and professional development, which is largely conducted on-site and grounded in their daily work. So school buildings also need to offer appropriate spaces for teachers to collaborate, learn and innovate together in multidisciplinary teams – yet they too often fail to meet this expectation.

Today, we are pleased to launch the OECD School User Survey: Improving learning spaces together, which gives voice to those who use schools on a daily basis. This unique OECD tool consists of three self-assessment questionnaires designed for students, teachers and school leaders. They can be used to collect and triangulate evidence on the actual use of learning spaces, and to solicit user perspectives, as well.

The OECD School User Survey focuses on five areas related to the learning spaces in schools:

• Physical environment and its use
• Use of technology
• Comfort and safety
• Perceptions of learning environments
• Overall satisfaction with the school facilities

Survey results can be used at the school level to support continuous improvement and the intelligent use or refurbishment of educational facilities. They can provide deeper insights into how physical learning environments shape teaching practices and affect students’ learning outcomes and well-being. They can also contribute to monitoring the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goal (4.1.a.) on the quality of the physical learning environment in schools.

We hope that this tool will be useful to school leaders, teachers, local authorities, school facilities managers and national governments around the world as they seek to maximise the educational impact of their investments in building and refurbishing physical learning environments. By making this survey tool freely available in the public domain, we would like to encourage schools around the world to experiment with, learn from and share their survey results with their peers.

Our next step will be to explore options for making the OECD School User Survey available online in multilingual versions. For ultimately, our goal is not just to make better use of limited education resources and existing school buildings – it is to improve the learning outcomes and well-being of students everywhere.

Learn more:

• OECD School User Survey: Improving learning spaces together

What can PISA tell us about teacher policies?

By Francesco Avvisati
Analyst, Directorate for Education and Skills

Photo credit: Jeffrey Hamilton/Unsplash

Teachers are the most important resource in today’s schools. Teacher salaries and training represent the greatest share of education spending in every country, and for good reason: students who are taught by the best teachers have much higher chances of succeeding in learning and life. It should come as no surprise, then, that policy makers across the world have focused greater attention on teaching, as they strive to improve student learning and make education more equitable and inclusive.

A new report published today aims to guide policy-makers in their quest for effective teacher policies by analysing data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and other OECD databases. Our report, Effective Teacher Policies: Insights from PISA, examines how the best-performing countries select, develop, evaluate and compensate teachers; how teacher sorting across schools affects the equity of education systems; and how countries can attract and retain talented candidates to the teaching profession.

It is entirely within our means to attract, retain and develop high-quality teachers.

The report shows that not all students have equal access to high-quality teaching, and that this inequality can explain much of the learning gaps observed between the most advantaged and disadvantaged students – both within and across countries. (See this month’s PISA in Focus for more.) In about half of the 69 countries and economies examined, teachers in schools with high concentrations of disadvantaged students tend to have lower qualifications or credentials than teachers in the most advantaged schools. And in education systems where this is observed – including France, Italy, the Netherlands and the public school system in the United States – the gap in student performance related to socio-economic status tends to be wider than in countries such as Canada, Finland, Japan, or Korea, where teacher qualifications, credentials and experience are more balanced across schools.

The report also finds that in some countries, teachers truly are seen as lifelong learners, who constantly seek to improve their practice with support from principals and colleagues. High-performing countries such as Australia and Singapore help teachers bridge between theory and practice with a mandatory and extended period of practical classroom training at the start of their career. These countries cultivate a habit of inquiry and reflection throughout teachers’ careers, as well – for example, through school workshops to address major issues or by using teacher evaluation instruments to develop a learning plan for all teachers.

And contrary to popular belief, our report shows that high-performing systems do not enjoy a natural privilege simply due to a traditional respect for teachers. These systems have also developed a high-quality teaching force through deliberate policy choices that were carefully implemented over time. There is, in other words, no room to feel complacent or resigned about the education system of any country. As our report shows, it is entirely within our means to attract, retain and develop high-quality teachers, and to deploy the best teachers where the challenges are greatest, thereby redressing the inequities that limit opportunities for so many students.


Learn more:

• Effective Teacher Policies: Insights from PISA
• PISA in Focus no. 85: In which countries do the most highly qualified and experienced teachers teach in the most difficult schools? 

Are Norwegian universities preparing students for a changing labour market?

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

Photo credit: Mikael Kristenson/Unsplash

In many countries, there are increasing concerns about the gap between the qualifications and skills that universities deliver, and those that the labour market demands. Employers are becoming especially vocal about this, claiming that they cannot find graduates with the skills sets they need. And as globalisation and digitalisation continue to transform economies, we can expect to see profound changes in the skills that employers demand in the future. In other words, the skills shortages of today might not be the same as those of tomorrow.

Ensuring that the supply of skills more or less matches demand – both today and tomorrow – is no easy undertaking. Higher education has the very difficult task of equipping students with generic and domain-specific knowledge and skills that last for a lifetime. This is almost impossible. Simplistic answers will not do, and past attempts at fine-grained “manpower planning” (i.e., estimating the demand for specific qualifications in the future and conditioning entry into studies accordingly) have often ended in failure. People often respond to different opportunities or experience life-events that change the course of their professional paths, sometimes by taking jobs that are not related to their study. And jobs demand often changes significantly, even within the four or five years that the study requires.

Consequently, higher education institutions in Norway and other countries seem to take a very relaxed attitude to labour market demands, and tend to maintain that giving students the choice to enrol in a given programme of study is still the best guarantee of motivation and success. They expect graduates to be able to cope with change and uncertainty throughout their lifetimes, whatever their field of study. In these countries, freedom of choice remains an important social value – but is this approach sufficient.

Today, we published Higher Education in Norway: Labour Market Relevance and Outcomes, a review of the Norwegian system’s capacity to link skills demand and supply. In many aspects, the situation in Norway is very positive. Indeed, high graduate employment rates and relatively high earnings in a booming economy suggest that there are almost no problems to worry about. But high employment rates and a compressed wage structure, in which it is difficult to measure returns on investment, can hide real problems. Good economic fortune can easily lead to complacency, whereas it should be seen as an opportunity to prepare for the future. And the Norwegian government knows that its future world will be different: less dependent on oil, more dependent on technology and more open to the world. Are the skills that university graduates attain the right ones to prepare the country for this transition?

The chart above displays the literacy, numeracy and problem-solving proficiency of Norwegian higher education graduates across a number of fields of study, as measured in the OECD Survey of Adult Skills in 2012. It indicates that there are important differences in graduates’ skills across different fields of study and the variation in these foundation skills is high. Yet these differences are not mirrored in labour market success. Health, welfare and education professionals seem to have relatively low levels of foundation skills, but they enjoy some of the best employment rates and most stable earnings of all graduates, thanks to the continuous demand for skilled labour in their respective sectors. In contrast, graduates from the arts and the humanities have relatively high skill levels, but relatively weak labour market outcomes. Compared to graduates in other fields of study, arts and humanities graduates have a harder time finding jobs that make full use of the knowledge and skills they developed in higher education.

Our report suggests various measures and strategies to strengthen labour market relevance and outcomes of higher education in Norway: for example, by more directly connecting studies to the world of work, strengthening cooperation between institutions and social partners, or improving labour market information and career guidance systems. But a more profound reflection is needed to ensure that the country’s higher education system delivers the skills and qualifications needed in the economy and society of the future. Norwegian universities still place a very high value on domain- and discipline-specific knowledge. But Norwegian graduates will need much deeper and broader transversal skills (cognitive, non-cognitive, social and emotional) to deal with uncertainty and change, and to perform future jobs.

Today, there is no clear consensus view about the role of higher education in developing the skills outside the traditional discipline-specific ones. But it is clear that universities, governments and social partners in Norway have a shared responsibility to actively improve the labour market relevance of higher education.


Read more:
Higher Education in Norway: Labour Market Relevance and Outcomes

Five myths about education, debunked

By Andreas Schleicher

Director, Directorate for Education and Skills

Photo credit: Shutterstock

It’s so much easier to educate students for our past than for their future. Schools are inherently conservative social systems; as parents we get nervous when our children learn things we don’t understand, and even more so when they no longer study things that were so important for us. Teachers are more comfortable teaching how they were taught than how they were taught to teach. And, as a politician, you can lose an election over education issues, but you can rarely win one, because it takes far more than an election cycle to translate intentions into results.

So changing education bureaucracies seems like moving graveyards: it’s often hard to rely on the people out there to help, because the status quo has so many protectors. The biggest risk to schooling today isn’t its inefficiency, but that our way of schooling is losing its purpose and relevance. And when fast gets really fast, being slower to adapt makes education systems really slow and disoriented.

We live in a world in which the kind of things that are easy to teach and test have also become easy to digitise and automate. Education has won the race with technology throughout history, but there is no guarantee it will do so in the future. Students growing up with a great smartphone but a poor education will face unprecedented risks. When we could still assume that what we learn in school will last for a lifetime, teaching content knowledge and routine cognitive skills was rightly at the centre of education. Today, the world no longer rewards you for what you know – Google knows everything – but for what you can do with what you know. If all we do is teach our children what we know, they may remember enough to follow in our footsteps. But it is only if we help them build a reliable compass and navigation skills that they will be able to go anywhere and find their way through this increasingly complex, volatile and ambiguous world.

One of the reasons why we get stuck in education is that our thinking is framed by so many myths. So I start my new book, World Class: Building a 21st-century school system, by debunking some of the most common.

• “The poor will always do badly in school.” That’s not true: the 10% most disadvantaged kids in Shanghai do better in maths than the 10% most advantaged students in large American cities.

• “Immigrants will lower the performance of a country on international comparisons.” That’s not true: there is no relationship between the share of immigrant students and the quality of an education system; and the school systems in which immigrant students settle matter a lot more than the country where they came from. 

• “Smaller classes mean better results.” That’s not true: whenever high-performing education systems have to make a choice between a smaller class and a better teacher, they go for the latter. Often it is small classes that have created the Taylorist culture where teachers end up doing nothing other than teaching, and don’t have the time to support individual students, collaborate with other teaching professionals or work with parents – activities that are hallmarks of high-performing education systems. 

• “More time spent learning always means better results.” That’s not true: students in Finland spend little more than around half the number of hours studying than what students in the United Arab Emirates spend; but students in Finland learn a lot in a short time, while students in the United Arab Emirates learn very little in a lot of time. 

• “The results in PISA are merely a reflection of culture.” That’s not true: rapidly improving education systems did not change their culture but their education policies and practices. 

Why is our thinking so captured by myths and past practice? Because education systems have a habit of building “walls” that separate teachers, schools or the systems themselves from peer learning. When I started PISA, the central idea was to break those walls. The idea was to count what counts – that is, to collect high-quality data and combine that with information on wider social outcomes; to analyse that data to empower educators and researchers to make more informed decisions; and to harness collaborative power to act on the data, both by lowering the cost of political action, and at times by raising the cost of political inaction, as well.

The good news is that our knowledge about what works in education has improved vastly. In my book, I write extensively about what makes school systems successful, and what makes high-performing school systems different.

Still, knowledge is only as valuable as our capacity to act on it. To transform schooling at scale, we need not just a radical vision of what is possible, but also smart strategies to help drive change. The road of education reform is littered with good ideas that were poorly implemented. The laws, regulations, structures and institutions on which education leaders tend to focus are just like the small tip of an iceberg.

The reason it is so hard to move school systems is that there is a much larger invisible part under the waterline. This invisible part is about the interests, beliefs, motivations and fears of the people who are involved in education, including parents and teachers. This is where unexpected collisions occur, because this part of education reform tends to evade the radar of public policy. That is why education leaders are rarely successful with reform unless they build a shared understanding and collective ownership for change; and unless they build capacity and create the right policy climate, with accountability measures designed to encourage innovation rather than compliance.

Our task is not to make the impossible possible, but to make the possible attainable. 

Many teachers and schools are ready for change. To encourage their growth, policy needs to shift towards inspiring and enabling innovation, identifying and sharing best practice. Such a shift will need to be built on trust: trust in education, in educational institutions, in schools and teachers, in students and communities. Trust is an essential part of good governance in all public services, and a key determinant of where great people want to work. But trust cannot be legislated and mandated; that is why it is so hard to build into traditional administrative structures. And trust is always intentional. Trust can only be nurtured and inspired through healthy relationships and constructive transparency. That is the lesson we can all learn from Finland, where opinion polls consistently show high levels of public trust in education. At a time when command-and-control systems are weakening, building trust is the most promising way to advance and fuel modern education systems.

In the face of all these challenges, we don’t need to be passive. While technology and globalisation have disruptive implications for our economic and social structure, these implications are not predetermined. Their outcomes will be determined by our collective response to these disruptions – the interplay between the technological frontier and the cultural, social, institutional and economic agents that we mobilise in response. We have agency, the ability to anticipate and frame our actions with purpose, and to devise and execute a plan to achieve that purpose.

I decided to write this book when I saw children from the poorest neighborhoods of Shanghai learning from Shanghai’s best teachers. It was then that I realised that universal, high-quality education is an attainable goal, and that our task is not to make the impossible possible, but to make the possible attainable. This is not rocket science; it is entirely within our means to deliver a future for millions of learners who currently don’t have one.



World Class: Building a 21st century school system is available as a free download here.

Why social emotional learning matters for migrant students and how schools can help

By Andreas Schleicher, Director, Directorate for Education and Skills

and John McLaughlin,  Deputy Education & Early Childhood Development Minister, New Brunswick

Photo credit: Feliphe Schiarolli/Unsplash

The world is experiencing major geopolitical, economic, environmental and social shifts resulting in increased international migration. In turn, migration flows are having a snowball effect on cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious diversity in many of today's classrooms, particularly in cities and large metropolitan areas. As a result, calls for schools to help their students develop social and emotional skills – in addition to strong academic skills – are growing louder. Social and emotional skills are crucial for a child’s ability to thrive in complex, interconnected and highly diverse environments in and outside of school. Additionally, the OECD’s own work has shown that these skills are crucial assets for the working environments of the 21^st  century.

We should view migration flows not only as a challenge, but also as an opportunity. If we work together to support our teachers and principals while having an open mind, a bold and ambitious heart, and a kind and welcoming spirit, we can reshape our schools and adapt our classrooms – and ourselves – to better meet the needs of today’s children and tomorrow’s citizens.

As a result of the unique challenges immigrant and refugee children face, many have distinct social and emotional needs. For example, some students may have experienced trauma fleeing war-torn countries during their migration. Others may have been separated from their immediate or extended family, leaving them with feelings of guilt and shame about loved ones left behind. Community ties were broken for all children who have experienced migration,  and the resulting stress can have a lasting impact on their socio-emotional development. Even when parents are present, they might be overwhelmed by their own experience of displacement,leaving them unable to support their children’s social and emotional development.

Migrant children have to negotiate new roles and identities in an unfamiliar cultural context. Some are called to demonstrate allegiance to their native or host country when choosing which language to speak, which sport to practice, which music to listen to, or which social group to join. They also have to juggle the attitudes and stereotypes of numerous different social groups and find where they fit in. Adjusting to their new environment can be a long bumpy road, but through the support of teachers, school principals, other education professionals and communities migrant children can navigate the difficult transition.

Diversity can be an opportunity for students without an immigrant background to develop social and emotional skills.

At the same time, diversity can also be an opportunity for students without an immigrant background to develop social and emotional skills. This includes self-awareness  of their own attitudes, stereotypes and emotions; social awareness, which enables them to empathise with others from diverse environments; the capacity to manage diverse social relationships by making constructive choices about how to act and behave in social interactions; and social engagement, which reflects their desire to contribute to the well-being of their school and community.

In an effort to address these challenges, the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development of New Brunswick in Canada, the Directorate for Education and Skills at the OECD and the Council of Education Ministers in Canada have organised a policy forum on the theme: “Social Emotional Learning to Foster a Sense of Belonging for Immigrant and Refugee Learners”.  On May 31^stand June 1^st, a group of international experts, practitioners, school leaders, teachers and policy makers will convene in Fredericton, Canada to consider how learning from past practices could help change the future of education and support the social and emotional learning of migrant and refugee children.

In the spirit of the OECD’s Strength through Diversity initiative, international and Canadian participants will bring  a wide range of perspectives to this forum, given their diverse roles, responsibilities and backgrounds. The aim is not only to advance our understanding of what has happened so far and discuss what may come next; we also hope to create an international community that promotes effective school policies and practices to support migrant and refugee learners.

This forum will be the fourth in a series organised by the OECD’s Strength through Diversity project. Speakers will introduce key themes during small group discussions and exercises, as well as roundtables and panel discussions. The meeting will cover five key themes:

• The role of education in social and emotional learning and sense of belonging; 
• Language for social cohesion; 
• Culturally responsive teaching practices;
• Retention of immigrant children and education for global citizens; 
• Whether ICT and digital technologies are tools for fostering or threatening integration. 

The programme will, for the first time in the series, include school visits,  and on the first evening, participants will have the opportunity to meet community leaders, community organisers, and students from immigrant or refugee backgrounds, at the Beaverbrook Art Gallery reception.

The keynote address will be given by Dean Marcelo Suárez-Orozco, Wasserman Dean at the Graduate School of Education and Information Services, University of California – Los Angeles. Other speakers will include:

• Stefaan Hermans, Director for Policy Strategy and Evaluation in the European Commission's Directorate for Education Youth Sports and Culture 
• Professor Veronica Boix Mansilla, Harvard University 
• Professor Benedicta Egbo,University of Windsor 
• Professor Stacey Wilson-Forsberg, Wilfrid Laurier University 
• Dr. Angelica Galante, University of Toronto  
• Letitia Zwickert, high school teacher, Fulbright Specialist in Education and founder of MENTEE.

Lessons arising from the meeting will be shared in a proceedings document published on the Strength through Diversity website. We encourage all to read the proceedings when they are published, and we invite everyone to follow the meeting through live broadcasts on May 31^st (13:00 GMT to 23:00 GMT) and June 1^st (17:00 GMT).

In the spirit of the motto “stronger together”, we wish a productive forum and insightful discussions to all those who will travel to Fredricton. And to those joining us remotely: enjoy the show!


Read more: 

• Strength through Diversity - 4th Policy Forum, 31 May-1 June 2018