Purpose: To explore how systems of E&A can be used to improve the quality, equity and efficiency of school education. Focus: A Review of national approaches to E&A in school education (primary and secondary schools) Comprehensive approach: The Review looks at the various components of E&A such as: Student assessment; Teacher appraisal; School evaluation; The appraisal of school leaders; Education system evaluation.

1. OECD Review on Evaluation and Assessment
Frameworks for Improving School Outcomes
Synthesis Report: What have we learned?
Deborah Nusche, Thomas Radinger, Paulo Santiago and
Claire Shewbridge
Synergies for Better Learning: An International Perspective on
Evaluation and Assessment
International Conference, Oslo, 11-12 April 2013

2. Outline of Presentation
1. Key Features of the Review
2. Trends in Evaluation and Assessment (E&A)
3. The evaluation and assessment framework
4. Student Assessment
5. Teacher Appraisal
6. The Appraisal of School Leaders
7. School Evaluation
8. Education System Evaluation

3. 1. Key Features of the Review

4. OECD Review on Evaluation and Assessment
Frameworks for Improving School Outcomes
• Purpose: To explore how systems of E&A can be used to improve the
quality, equity and efficiency of school education.
• Focus: A Review of national approaches to E&A in school education
(primary and secondary schools)
• Comprehensive approach: The Review looks at the various components
of E&A such as:
– Student assessment;
– Teacher appraisal;
– School evaluation;
– The appraisal of school leaders;
– Education system evaluation.
• Large country participation: 26 education systems / 25 countries
producing a CBR; 14 country reviews.

5. OECD Review on Evaluation and Assessment
Frameworks: Key issues
1. Governance: Striking the right balance between central efforts and local
initiative and between accountability and development
2. Procedures: Designing the right instruments to ensure E&A contribute to
improvement of teaching and learning
3. Capacity: Developing competencies for E&A and for using feedback at all
levels of the education system
4. Use of results: Organising evaluative information in such a way that it
facilitates effective use by stakeholders; avoiding ‘misuse’ of E&A results

6. OECD Review on Evaluation and Assessment
Frameworks: Stakeholders and outputs
A wide range of groups involved
• National co-ordinators and informal groups within countries to produce CBRs
• 28 external reviewers involved in OECD-led Review teams
• About 90 schools visited and over 2 800 persons interviewed
• Links with other international organisations and key stakeholder groups (BIAC, TUAC, EC, Eurydice,
the World Bank, SICI, UNESCO)
• Collaboration with other OECD units (PISA, TALIS, CERI’s projects, NESLI)
A range of outputs
• Synthesis report Outputs available at
• Background papers (11) www.oecd.org/edu/evaluationpolicy
• Country Background Reports (26)
• Country Review Reports (14)
• Qualitative data collected (29 systems / 28 countries provided data)
• Meetings of the GNE on E&A (4)
• International Conference to launch synthesis report in Oslo 11-12 April
• Dissemination Conferences in countries

7. 2. Trends in Evaluation and
Assessment

8. Trends in Evaluation and Assessment
• Educational evaluation in school systems is expanding
– E&A is increasingly prominent in education policy
– Dedicated agencies are being created as part of new approaches to govern E&A
• There is a greater variety of E&A activities
• Educational measurement and indicators development are rising in importance
– Student outcomes as increasingly the focal point for analysis
– There is a growing emphasis on measuring student outcomes
– There is a proliferation of education indicators
• Larger and more varied uses are given to E&A results
• Accountability as a purpose of E&A is gaining in importance
• There is greater reliance on educational standards
• Assessment is becoming more international
• Assessment involves greater technological sophistication

9. 3. The evaluation and assessment
framework: Embracing a holistic
approach

10. The evaluation and assessment framework:
Components
1. Educational Context
The educational context shapes the E&A framework
2. Governance
Objectives
– Improving student outcomes! Often challenging to communicate.
– Range of functions: Accountability, certification, development, diagnostic
– Challenge: balance between the development and the accountability functions
Responsibilities
– Shared among a wide range of agents
– Dedicated intermediate agencies gain a prominent role
– The devolution of responsibilities involves a variety of trade-offs
Integration of the non-public sector
3. Overarching reference: Goals for student learning
– General goals for education system (including equity); specific student learning objectives
– Challenge: Alignment between goals for student learning and E&A

11. The evaluation and assessment framework:
Components
4. Design
Principles
Placing students at the centre; focussing on student outcomes; committing to transparency; culture of
sharing classroom practice; relying on teacher professionalism; diverse student needs
Main components, Main elements within components
Articulations: Within components; between components; moderation processes; links to classroom
5. Capacity for Evaluation and Assessment
Competencies for E&A
Skills for school leadership
Tools and guidelines for E&A
6. Use of results
Knowledge management
– Information systems; Identification of best practices; Innovation in education;
Evidence-based policy
7. Implementation of evaluation and assessment policies
Divergence of views and interests; consultations; involvement of professionals; clarity of purposes;
evidence to inform consensus-building; policy experimentation; evaluation of implementation;
capacity building; resources; timing.

12. The evaluation and assessment framework:
Practices

13. The evaluation and assessment framework:
Practices

14. The evaluation and assessment framework:
Policy Options
1. Governance
– Integrate the E&A framework, engaging in a strategic reflection
– Align the E&A framework with educational goals and student learning objectives
– E&A to align with the principles embedded in educational goals, be based on fit-for-purpose
procedures, and rely on a clear understanding of educational goals by school agents
– Secure links to the classroom and draw on teacher professionalism
– Articulation of ways for the E&A framework to generate improvements in classroom practice
through the E&A procedures which are closer to the place of learning
– Promote national consistency while giving room for local diversity
2. Design and procedures
– Ensure core components are sufficiently developed within the E&A framework
– Establish articulations between components of the E&A framework
– Place the students at the centre of the E&A framework
– Build on some key principles to effectively implement E&A
– Centrality of teaching and learning; importance of school leadership; equity as a key dimension;
commitment to transparency

15. The evaluation and assessment framework:
Policy Options
3. Capacity
– Sustain efforts to improve capacity for E&A
– Improve the articulation between levels of authority and assure support from the
centre
4. Use of results
– Maintain sound knowledge management within the overall E&A framework
– Commit to the use of evidence for policy development
5. Implementation
– Anticipate potential implementation difficulties
– Engage stakeholders and practitioners in the design and implementation of E&A
policies
– Communicate the rationale for reform
– Use pilots before full implementation and review implementation
– Ensure adequate capacity and sufficient resources

16. 4. Student assessment: Putting the
learner at the centre

17. Student Assessment
Evaluation and assessment framework Formative and summative
assessment
Student Internal and external
assessment assessment
Classroom
Teacher appraisal
School 1) Trends and current
School leader
appraisal practices
2) The potential of student
System School evaluation
assessment
3) Common challenges in
student assessment
System evaluation 4) Some policy options

18. Student Assessment: Practices
Trends
1) As national curricula increasingly emphasise ‘key competencies’ or ‘21st century
competencies’ for lifelong learning, countries are seeking to adapt their
assessment systems in order to capture such broader types of learning.
2) Research evidence on the benefits of using assessment results to inform teaching
and learning has increased policy attention to formative assessment. 18/29
systems have central policy frameworks for formative assessment in place.
3) Summative assessment and reporting remain important at key stages of schooling
in all countries. 21/29 systems had policy frameworks for internal summative
assessment in place to ensure transparency in marking and reporting.
4) Concerns about the quality of learning and assessment across schools have led to
a renewed focus on central standards and large-scale assessments to ensure high
standards for all students. 26/37 systems have central standardised examinations
in place.

19. Student Assessment: Analysis
The potential of student assessment
Formative assessment:
• Diagnose learning needs and differentiate teaching;
• Provide timely feedback to students
• Actively engage students in their own learning; strengthen their self-monitoring
• Help teachers and students adjust teaching and learning strategies
Summative assessment:
• Signal high standards and expected performance
• Motivate students to increase effort and achievement
• Provide information about performance to students, parents and others
• Certify learning and award qualifications

20. Student Assessment: Analysis
The challenges of student assessment
• Governance: Lack of alignment between central curricula, standards and
assessment approaches; lack of clarity of purposes; tensions between summative
and formative functions
• Procedures: Assessment formats tend to remain more traditional than curriculum
goals; national assessments focus mostly on literacy and numeracy and
predominantly use multiple choice and written tasks; limited use of ICT
• Capacity: Limited focus on students’ own assessment competencies; inadequacies
in teachers’ and school leaders’ preparation and training
• Use of results: Parental concerns about inadequate reporting information; lack of
transparency when using assessment results for high stakes decisions

21. Student Assessment: Policy Options
Governance: Establish a coherent framework for student assessment
• Balance between formative and summative; internal and external assessment
• Based on well-aligned reference documents (curriculum, standards, learning progressions, criteria to
judge performance and exemplars illustrating different levels of achievement )
• Clarity of purpose
Procedures: Ensure a comprehensive approach to student assessment
• Draw on a variety of assessment types to get a rounded picture of student learning
• Promote assessment formats that capture valued competencies
• Build on innovative approaches to assessment, and tap into the potential of ICT
• Provide tools and guidelines to support effective teacher-based assessment
Capacity: Make the assessment framework participatory and build
assessment competencies across the system
• Build student capacity to engage in their own assessment
• Promote teacher professionalism in assessment;
• Develop central expertise related to student assessment
Use of results: Ensure assessment is useful and informative
• Provide clear reporting guidelines to ensure transparency and fairness in reporting results
• Engage parents in education through adequate reporting and communication
• Promote regular use of assessment results to foster further learning

22. 5. Teacher appraisal: Enhancing
teacher professionalism

23. Teacher appraisal
Evaluation and assessment framework
For completion of
probation
Student For performance
assessment management
Classroom
Teacher appraisal For rewards
School
School leader
appraisal
1) Trends and practices
System School evaluation
2) The potential of teacher
appraisal
3) Common challenges in
System evaluation teacher appraisal
4) Some policy options

24. Teacher Appraisal: Practices
Frameworks for teacher appraisal: trends
• Teacher appraisal is the component of E&A frameworks where there is the most variation
across countries
• Practices range from highly prescriptive national systems to informal approaches mostly left
to the school level
• In many countries, there has been renewed focus on teacher appraisal in recent years,
reflecting recognition that effective appraisal can contribute to improved teaching quality
• Many systems (21/29) have developed central standards for the teaching profession that
can guide teacher appraisal processes
• Most systems (23/29) have policy frameworks for teacher appraisal in place.

25. Probation
Reward scheme
Country
Performance management
Australia
Austria
Belgium (Fl.)
Belgium (Fr.)
Canada
Chile
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Source: Information collected from countries participating in the Review
Finland
France
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Korea
Teacher Appraisal: Practices
Luxembourg
Existence of policy frameworks for teacher appraisal, 2011-12
Mexico
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
UK (Northern Ireland)

26. Teacher Appraisal: Analysis
The potential of teacher appraisal
• Provide feedback to teachers, identify suitable professional development
• Allow teachers to progress in their career and take on new responsibilities
based on solid evaluations of their performance
• Allow school leaders to be accountable for the quality of education in
every classroom; move on persistently underperforming teachers

27. Teacher Appraisal: Analysis
The challenges of teacher appraisal
• Governance: High stakes teacher appraisal may lead to a climate of stress and
anxiety; tensions between professional learning and accountability function of
teacher appraisal
• Procedures: Lack of a professional profile or standards to guide appraisal in some
countries; overreliance on one or two sources of information; insufficient
guidance for classroom observation; appraisal may increase workload for
teachers; inadequate use of student results to evaluate teachers
• Capacity: Limited preparation of teachers to benefit from their appraisal; school
leaders insufficiently trained for HR management and appraisal; lack of legitimacy
of evaluators
• Use of results: Difficulties in ensuring systematic follow-up with professional
development; absence of career opportunities for teachers; controversies around
the use of appraisal results for rewards.

28. Teacher Appraisal: Policy Options
Governance: Establish a coherent framework for teacher appraisal
• Consolidate regular developmental appraisal at the school level
• Establish periodic career-progression appraisal involving external evaluators
• Resolve tensions between the developmental and accountability functions
Procedures: Ensure a comprehensive approach to teacher appraisal
• Establish teaching standards to guide teacher appraisal
• Use multiple instruments and sources of evidence
• Provide support for effective classroom observations
• Avoid simplistic use of student assessment results for teacher appraisal
Capacity: Build capacity of both evaluators and evaluatees
• Prepare teachers for their role in the appraisal process
• Strengthen the capacity of school leaders for teacher appraisal
• Ensure that designated evaluators are qualified for their role
Use of results: Feed results into professional development, career
advancement and accountability
• Ensure that teacher appraisal feeds into professional development and school development
• Establish links between teacher appraisal and career advancement decisions
• Ensure that underperformance is identified and adequately addressed

29. 6. The appraisal of school leaders:
Fostering pedagogical leadership in
schools

30. School leader appraisal
Evaluation and assessment framework
Student
assessment
Classroom
Teacher appraisal
School
School leader
appraisal
1) Analytical approach
System School evaluation
2) Trends and practices
3) The potential of school
leader appraisal
System evaluation 4) Common challenges
5) Some policy options

31. School Leader Appraisal:
Analytical approach
Conceptualising school leadership
– Impact of school leadership
– The nature of effective leadership in schools
– The development of new and diverse models of school leadership
Scope
– Appraisal of individual school leaders
– Performance-management, employment-related decisions and rewards purposes

32. School leader appraisal: Practices
Approaches to the appraisal of principals in public schools
1. No appraisal (6/29 countries)
2. Local appraisal procedures and implementation (10/29 countries)
3. Central/state requirements for appraisal (17/29 countries)
– Employment-related appraisal (3/17 countries)
– Mandatory periodic appraisal (14/17 countries)
Existence of central/state policy frameworks (15/17 countries)
1. Implementation through central/state, regional and/or intermediate authorities
(9/15 countries)
2. Implementation through local authorities and/or school organising bodies (9/15 countries)
Objectives of appraisal
1. Summative purpose (8/17 countries)
2. Formative purpose (3/17 countries)
3. Combination of summative and formative purposes (7/17 countries)

33. School leader appraisal: Analysis (1)
The potential of school leader appraisal
• Tool to communicate a vision of effective school leadership
• Tool to influence school leaders’ practices and behaviours
• Opportunity for reflection, feedback and support
• Risk of increasing school leaders’ work load and stress levels
• Concerns about existing approaches to appraisal in various countries

34. School leader appraisal: Analysis (2)
Challenges for school leader appraisal
• Governance: Balancing consistency through central/state frameworks with local
diversity; Combining developmental and accountability functions
• Procedures: Ensuring a focus on pedagogical leadership and scope for local
contextualisation; Gathering a feasible amount of information to yield an accurate,
fair, valid and reliable picture of performance; Accounting for student outcomes;
Reflecting new and diverse models of school leadership
• Capacity: Focussing attention towards the development of capacity among
evaluators and school leaders
• Use of results: Establishing feedback as a core element of appraisal; Ensuring links
between appraisal and meaningful professional development opportunities;
Establishing opportunities for career advancement

35. School leader appraisal: Policy Options
Governance: Promote school leader appraisal within the E&A framework
• Develop a central/state policy framework to strengthen the systematic appraisal of school leaders
• Ensure scope to adjust procedures to local, school and individual circumstances
• Ensure links between school evaluation and school leader appraisal
Procedures: Promote the appraisal of pedagogical leadership with scope for
local adaptation
• Develop professional standards for school leaders
• Ensure scope for the local selection of appraisal aspects and criteria in line with central/state
frameworks
• Provide school leaders with opportunities to further develop pedagogical leadership skills
• Promote the appraisal of school leaders’ competencies for monitoring, evaluation and assessment
Capacity: Build capacity of both appraisers and school leaders
• Prepare school leaders and evaluators for their role in the appraisal process
• Promote school leader appraisal as an opportunity for peer learning
Use of results: Ensure links between appraisal and professional
development, and develop career advancement opportunities
• Ensure that appraisal informs meaningful professional development that pays attention to individual
and school needs
• Develop career advancement opportunities that are informed by appraisal procedures

36. 7. School evaluation: From
compliancy to quality

37. School evaluation
Evaluation and assessment framework
Student
assessment
Classroom
External evaluation
Teacher appraisal
(inspection / review)
School
School leader
School self-evaluation /
appraisal
review
System School evaluation School performance
measures
System evaluation

38. School Evaluation: Practices
• External school evaluation is established in the vast majority
of OECD countries (Except: FIN, GRC, HUN, ITA, JPN, LUX & MEX)
– Typically devised by central or state authorities and conducted by
Education authorities and/or specific bodies (e.g. School Inspectorate,
School Review Body)
– Publication of comparative school performance measures
• Almost universal focus in national policy to stimulate school
self-evaluation (No requirements in GRC, ITA, MEX and ESP)
– Requirements vary significantly in nature, e.g. conduct self evaluation;
produce specific report on school development; account for school
quality
– Providing comparative information to schools on performance and
other measures

39. School Evaluation: Analysis - governance
• Fitting school evaluation policies to the wider governance
context
– Public demands for school performance information
– Optimising use of resources for external school evaluation (cycles,
proportionality)
• Articulating external school evaluation and school self-
evaluation
• Risks that compliancy dominates school evaluation
– Multiple forms of school accountability
– Demands for evidence in external evaluation / administrative burden
in schools
– Documentation v. classroom observation
– Requirements for schools to develop specific reports

40. School Evaluation: Analysis - procedures
Refence standards Instruments and information sources
Administrative school reporting;
COMPLIANCY Legal standards Verification during external school evaluation
visits
QUALITY:
Criteria to evaluate educational Classroom observation - and evaluation
Educational
processes, notably teaching and indicators; Mechanisms for feedback from
practices
learning students, teachers and parents
School-developed tests to monitor student
Outcomes Student learning objectives progress;
Standardised assessments /examinations
School-developed surveys, student and
Student, parent and staff school councils/ centrally-developed surveys
satisfaction or questionnaires as part of standardised
assessments
School capacity School leadership; Effectiveness of Verification of school self-evaluation
for self- school self-evaluation; processes and results during external school
evaluation School capacity to improve evaluation visits

41. School Evaluation: Analysis - capacity
Related challenges for capacity
Ensuring legal knowledge/competencies within the external school evaluation
COMPLIANCY body and school leadership;
Reducing the burden of compliancy reporting on schools
QUALITY:
Recruitment and training of external evaluators/reviewers;
Educational Training school leadership in undertaking classroom observation;
practices Stimulating and supporting peer reviews among schools;
Central support tools for stakeholder surveys;
Engaging teachers in analysis of student results and giving them autonomy to
make changes for improvement;
Outcomes Time and resources at the school level to analyse data
Central capacity to develop suitable standardised assessments and capacity to
report back results
Ensuring leadership of school self-evaluation activities:
Building trust in self-evaluation processes;
School capacity for Engaging school leaders in external school evaluation activities;
self-evaluation Creating roles and responsibilities within the school;
Engaging the full community in school self-evaluation activities

42. School Evaluation: Analysis – use of results
Related challenges for the reporting and use of results
Separating school audit and school self-evaluation reporting;
COMPLIANCY
Sanctions for schools not complying with legal standards
QUALITY:
Reporting of results of external school evaluation;
Immediate feedback to teachers and school leaders;
Educational
Feeding into professional development and school development
practices
Mechanisms to follow up how schools act on external school evaluation results
when educational practices are identified for improvement
School developed tests: Integrating these results into analysis of school
development priorities, including professional development needs
Standardised assessments/ examinations: Timeliness of feedback of data;
Outcomes validity and relevance of data; tools for analysis; accuracy of reporting and
contextualisation of results
Integration of student, staff and parent satisfaction results into school
reporting and development plans
School reporting to its community; Integrating the use of self-evaluation
School capacity for
results in school development/strategic improvement cycles;
self-evaluation
School capacity and the cycle/intensity of external school evaluations

43. School Evaluation: Policy Options
Governance: Underlies all options on procedures, capacity and use of results
• Clarify the role and purpose of school evaluation
• Focus on the improvement of teaching, learning and student outcomes
• Evaluate and adapt external school evaluation to reflect the maturity of the school evaluation culture
• Raise the profile of school self-evaluation
Procedures: Ways to minimise the burden and maximise the fairness
• Develop nationally agreed criteria for school quality to guide school evaluation
• Develop appropriate resources for school self-evaluation
• Ensure transparency in external school evaluation procedures and a strong evidence base
Capacity: A priority for school improvement
• Ensure credibility of external school evaluators and sufficient capacity and retraining as necessary
• Strengthen school principals’ capacity to stimulate an effective school self-evaluation culture
• Promote the engagement of all staff and students in school self-evaluation
• Promote peer learning among schools
Use of results: Learning what to improve and where to intervene
• Promote wider use of external school evaluation results and ensure systematic follow up
• Optimise feedback of centrally collected data to schools for self-evaluation and development planning
• Report a broad set of school performance measures with adequate contextual information

44. School Evaluation: Policy Options
Governance: Underlies all options on procedures, capacity and use of results
• Clarify the role and purpose of school evaluation
• Focus on the improvement of teaching, learning and student outcomes
• Evaluate and adapt external school evaluation to reflect the maturity of the school evaluation culture
• Raise the profile of school self-evaluation
Procedures: Ways to minimise the burden and maximise the fairness
• Develop nationally agreed criteria for school quality to guide school evaluation
• Develop appropriate resources for school self-evaluation
• Ensure transparency in external school evaluation procedures and a strong evidence base
Capacity: A priority for school improvement
• Ensure credibility of external school evaluators and sufficient capacity and retraining as necessary
• Strengthen school principals’ capacity to stimulate an effective school self-evaluation culture
• Promote the engagement of all staff and students in school self-evaluation
• Promote peer learning among schools
Use of results: Learning what to improve and where to intervene
• Promote wider use of external school evaluation results and ensure systematic follow up
• Optimise feedback of centrally collected data to schools for self-evaluation and development planning
• Report a broad set of school performance measures with adequate contextual information

45. 8. Education system evaluation:
Informing policies for system
improvement

46. Education system evaluation
Evaluation and assessment framework
Student
assessment
Classroom
Teacher appraisal
School
School leader
appraisal
National education
system
System School evaluation
Sub-national education
system
e.g. local authority, schools
System evaluation
in religious/pedagogical
network

47. Education System Evaluation: Practices
• Major increase in use of monitoring systems across OECD
– Large-scale student assessments
• By the late 1990s all OECD countries had participated in an international study
• Development of national assessments
– Stakeholder surveys and longitudinal information
A A B B C C C D E F F H I I I I K L M N N N P P S S E
U U F F A H Z N S I R U S R S T O U E L Z O O R V V S SW UK-
S T L R N L E K T N A N L L R A R X X D L R L T N K P E NI
Nat Asst: Full
cohort
Nat Asst:
Sample
Survey:
Students
Survey:
Teachers
Survey: Parents
Longitudinal
information
• Thematic evaluations in samples of schools

48. Education System Evaluation:
Analysis - governance
• Calls to monitor performance in the public sector
• Recognising the economic importance of education
• Many systems do not have an overall framework for
education system evaluation
Indicators of a strategic approach Countries
information collection
Mapping against system priorities and Australia; Czech Republic; Hungary; Israel;
plan to prioritise new collection Netherlands; Slovak Republic
Mapping against system priorities France; Iceland; Ireland; Northern Ireland
(UK)
Plan to prioritise collection of new Belgium (French & Flemish Comm.); Chile;
information Finland; Slovenia; Spain
Neither Austria; Denmark; Italy; Korea;
Luxembourg; Mexico; New Zealand;
Norway; Poland; Sweden

49. Education System Evaluation:
Analysis - procedures
• Reference standards may be many
– Broad goals for education system; Student learning objectives /
standards; Objectives set for specific education policies
– The use of targets for system performance
• E.g. European Union benchmarks
• Improvement or decline over time in specific assessments
• Monitoring trends in equity and quality
– Availability and reliability of contextual information
– Prioritising reliability of national assessments, but validity?
• Multiple choice (27); Closed-format short answer (21); open-ended writing
tasks/calculations (17); Performing a task (7); oral elements (6)
• Broader curriculum coverage with sample surveys v full cohort
– Capitalising on technology
– Tensions: monitoring trends and holding schools accountable
– Specific reviews on aspects of the school system

50. Education System Evaluation:
Analysis - capacity
• Capacity to produce evidence on system performance and
use results
– The creation of specific bodies
– Credibility and objectivity of evidence and reporting underlying policy
development
– Capacity to synthesise and disseminate results
• Evaluation capacity at sub-national level may vary
significantly
– Local monitoring and school use of data
• Aligning goals
• Building trust

51. Education System Evaluation:
Analysis – reporting and use of results
• Communicating education system evaluation results clearly
and comprehensively
– Reporting principles: relevance; credibility; timeliness; accessibility
and interpretability
– Avoiding media misinterpretation
– Engaging key stakeholders in discussion of results
• Making better use of results in planning and policy
development
– Too much information! Findings ways to better channel results
– Overall summative report on the education system
– Political urgency versus availability of broad research base
– Research and empirical analysis
– Information systems to promote use of results at local levels

52. Education System Evaluation:
Policy Options
Governance: Being systematic and strategic for better informed policy
making
• Ensure a broad concept of education system evaluation within the E&A framework
• Ensure policy making is informed by high-quality measures, but not driven by their availability
• Situate education system evaluation in the broader context of public sector performance requirements
Procedures: Developing an approach to learn from a broad evidence base
• Develop a national education indicator framework
• Design a national strategy to monitor student learning standards
• Ensure the collection of: qualitative information; and contextual information to monitor equity
• Assure the monitoring of changes over time and progress of particular student cohorts
Capacity: Ensuring continuity and credibility
• Establish and secure capacity for education system evaluation
• Promote the development of evaluation capacity at the local authority level
• Ensure objectivity and credibility in education system evaluation activities
Use of results: Strengthening analysis for system improvement
• Strengthen analysis of education system evaluation results for planning and policy development
• Communicate key results of education system evaluation to stakeholders
• Support feedback for local monitoring

53. Thank you for your attention!
www.oecd.org/edu/evaluationpolicy