Table of Contents  Executive Summary Summaries in 18 languages How to obtain this publication Related Reading Erratum

Improving the quality of education is a key policy objective in OECD countries. Major education reforms are under way around the world in response to the demands of making lifelong learning opportunities available to all. Education Policy Analysis provides an opportunity to reflect on, and learn from, this rich international experience.

The 2004 edition contains state-of-the-art reviews of policy issues and international developments in the role of non-university institutions in widening access to tertiary education and in making it more diverse and relevant; how countries can gain educational returns from their investments in educational ICT;  the challenges that lifelong learning poses for schools; and  how tax policies can help to foster lifelong learning. The 2004 edition also includes a summary of recent major education policy changes across a wide range of fields in OECD countries.

• Table of Contents
• Executive Summary

Chapter 1: Alternatives to Universities Revisited

• Summary
• Table 1.1 Tertiary enrolments by type of programme and type of institution, 2001
• Figure 1.1 Persons aged 15 and over participating in tertiary education by type of programme, 2001
• Table 1.2 Age distribution of ISCED 5A enrolments by type of institution, 2001
• Figure 1.2 Total enrolments in selected non-university tertiary institutions, by ISCED level
• Figure 1.3 Relative earnings1 by level of educational attainment, 25-to-64-year-olds

Chapter 2:  Getting Returns From Investing in Educational ICT

• Summary 
• Figure 2.1 Mean number of 15-year-old students per computer, 2003
• Table 2.1 Mean number of students per computer, 2000 and 2003
• Table 2.2 Students per computer and frequency of use of computers at school, 2003
• Figure 2.2 Students per computer and GDP per capita, 2003
• Table 2.3 15-year-olds reporting that computers are used either almost every day or a few times a week for twelve specific purposes, 2003
• Table 2.4 15-year-old students reporting that they frequently use computers to learn school material or that they frequently use educational software, 2000 and 2003
• Figure 2.4 Average frequency with which 15-year-old students used computers at school, 2000 and 2003
• Table 2.5 Percentage of upper secondary students attending schools where principals report that computers are used a lot for various educational purposes, 2001
• Figure 2.5 Mean number of computers in the homes of the lowest and highest achievers, 2000
• Figure 2.6 Low achievers’ interest in, comfort with and perceived ability to use computers, 2001

Chapter 3: How Well do Schools Contribute to Lifelong Learning?

• Summary 
• Figure 3.1 15-year-olds reaching specified thresholds on PISA combined reading literacy scale, 2000
• Figure 3.2 Students at each level of proficiency on the PISA combined reading literacy scale, 2000
• Figure 3.3 Students with a low sense of belonging at school, 2000
• Figure 3.4 Upper secondary teachers who participated in professional development activities in the 2000-01 school year, according to principals
• Figure 3.5 Expected years in education and not in education for 15-to-29-year-olds, 2002
• Figure 3.6 Expected years in education before age 30 of 15-year-olds (2002) and percentage of time in education expected to be combined with employment

Chapter 4: Taxation and Lifelong Learning

• Summary
• Table 4.1 Economic and financial constraints on investment in learning
• Table 4.2 Overview of schemes for co-financing lifelong learning
• Table 4.3 Central government corporate taxes, 2001
• Table 4.4 Marginal personal income tax rates (all-in) on gross labour income, 2003
• Table 4.5 Example of benefits of tax deduction for a given training expenditure of USD 1 000, by income level
• Table 4.6 Income thresholds at which income tax rates begin to apply
• Table 4.7 Overview of main features of tax policy regarding investment in human capital Selected countries: Austria, Finland,

Annex: Recent education policy developments

This annex contains summaries of recent education policy developments. Countries were invited to submit the summaries organised around the six strategic priorities that now structure the OECD’s work in education. Summaries were provided by 16 OECD countries: Australia; Austria; Belgium (French Community); Czech Republic; Denmark; Finland; France; Hungary; Japan; Korea; Luxembourg; Norway; Poland; Portugal; Slovak Republic; and the United Kingdom. In addition, contributions were provided by Israel and the Russian Federation, which have observer status on the OECD Education Committee.

Erratum:

The text on page 62 should read as follows:
One generally encouraging message to emerge from analysis of PISA data is that within many OECD countries the number of students per computer in the schools in which the weakest students are located is generally no higher than the number of students per computer in other schools.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summaries in

• Chinese
• Czech
• Danish
• Dutch
• Finnish
• Greek
• Hungarian
• Icelandic
• Italian
• Japanese
• Korean
• Norwegian
• Polish
• Portuguese
• Russian
• Slovak
• Spanish
• Swedish
• Turkish

How to obtain this publication

The complete edition of Education Policy Analysis 2004 is available from:

• SourceOECD for subscribing institutions and many libraries
• OECD Online Bookshop for non-subscribers -- Did you know you can browse the book online via our online bookshop?
• OLISnet, under "Publication Locator", for government officials with accounts  (subscribe) 
• Password-protected web site  for accredited journalists Protected Site for Journalists

Related reading

• Education Policy Analysis 2003
• Education Policy Analysis 2002
• Education Policy Analysis 2001
• Education Policy Analysis 1999
• Education Policy Analysis 1998
• Education Policy Analysis 1997

 

 

 

 

 

 

Related Documents

 

Education Policy Analysis 2004 - Alternatives to Universities Revisited