This chapter brings together the findings of previous chapters of the report to identify policy priorities and strategies for improving student learning, equity and well-being in Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries. It outlines seven building blocks for an ambitious policy agenda aimed at ensuring all students master basic skills while also supporting high performers, addressing disparities in education opportunities, expanding access to secondary education and promoting student well-being, especially among girls and disadvantaged students. While most recommendations are relevant to all systems in the region, some are specifically targeted to individual economies.
Education in the Eastern Partnership: Findings from PISA
Abstract
This chapter brings together the findings from the report and identifies policy priorities and potential strategies to address them. The chapter puts forward seven building blocks that could form part of an ambitious policy agenda to improve student learning, equity and well-being in countries of the Eastern Partnership (EaP) (see Figure 5.1 and Table 5.2).1 They draw on both strengths that EaP countries and economies can build on and challenges they need to address. With their emphasis on foundational skills, high-skill job transitions and focus on marginalised and disadvantaged students, the building blocks suggest a holistic approach to fostering equity and excellence in education. While some of the building blocks will benefit all students, additional measures can be targeted at specific groups of students who are identified in the report as likely to benefit from specialised support.
Most of the recommendations are relevant to all EaP systems. However, some are especially pertinent to some contexts, given the relative importance of different factors associated with the quality and equity of learning opportunities. For example, improving opportunities for rural students is especially important in Moldova, which has a large rural population and persistent disparities in educational achievement to the detriment of rural students. Other recommendations are only relevant to some EaP countries/economies. For example, expanding access to secondary school is a priority for Baku (Azerbaijan)2 and Georgia, where coverage remains relatively low, but not in Moldova and Ukrainian regions. Recommendations that apply only to some countries/economies are shown together with the flags of the countries they apply to in Figure 5.1. The specific challenges facing Ukraine following the war also need to be recognised. Box 5.1 summarises key insights for the country, which is the context for the general recommendations.
As highlighted in Chapter 1, the policy implications distilled from the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) are particularly relevant for secondary schooling. However, since learning is a continuous journey for students, the proposed way forward for EaP countries/economies also includes recommendations for earlier stages of the education system. The chapter also draws on further analyses of EaP countries/economies carried out by the OECD, in partnership with the European Commission and the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), in recent years, as well as additional secondary research and data, such as from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the World Bank and non-governmental organisations, to contextualise these findings.
Note: Building blocks are coloured in light grey and apply to all EaP countries/economies, except for those that display country icons. “Expand access to secondary school” applies to Baku and Georgia. “Support language minority students” applies to Georgia and Moldova.
PISA and other OECD reports show no single best way to organise a national or state education system to achieve excellence, equity and well-being. Policy initiatives that work well in the context of one school system are not necessarily transferable to others. At the same time, available evidence likewise shows that deliberate policy choices, adequately funded and carefully implemented with stakeholder involvement over time, can lead to substantial improvements in student performance, equity and well-being, regardless of a country’s cultural or economic context (OECD, 2013[1]; 2011[2]; 2016[3]; 2018[4]; 2018[5]; 2011[6]). The chapter draws on these experiences and selected country examples that could inspire EaP countries and economies. It is hoped that the direction suggested in this chapter makes a meaningful contribution to policy discussions in EaP countries/economies on how to take school systems forward.
The context of Ukraine’s participation in PISA 2022 is a very specific one, as a result of the war. Despite the challenges the war brings, the country is currently engaged in ambitious reforms. This includes modernising its school curriculum in upper secondary education to give students greater choice. Pilot schools have been created nationally and are supported by the OECD.
The analysis in this report suggests several factors that could be taken into account in the further development of the country’s ongoing reforms and efforts to rebuild the school system as the country emerges from the war:
Students’ educational expectations have been decreasing significantly between 2018 and 2022, although they remain relatively high. Giving students a sense of the future and a perspective within the country seems important.
Students express a strong sense of belonging at school, potentially fuelled by the context of war. This is a strength that the country could build on.
While PISA’s coverage index for Ukrainian regions is not so robust in the current context, it seems important to understand the drop in coverage observed for Ukrainian regions. The war in Ukraine has interrupted the regular learning progression of many students who might need to be re-engaged in the school system at present or in the future.
The education system seems to rely, to a great extent, on digital resources to maintain continuity in teaching and learning. This provides an opportunity for teachers and students to draw lessons about effectively using these resources while underscoring the need to invest in competencies to use digital resources well. At the same time, despite the extensive usage of digital devices, digital distraction is slightly lower than in OECD countries, indicating students’ capacity to manage their attention.
The extent of teacher support in mathematics lessons, as reported by Ukrainian students, is similar to the OECD average. However, Ukrainian regions are the only EaP country/economy where greater teacher support is not associated with better mathematics performance. The reasons for this could be worth exploring (e.g. is this explained by teachers targeting support at lower-performance students? Could it be related to the challenges for teachers to support students remotely while schools operated on line to maintain continuity in education with the beginning of the war?).
Unlike in other EaP countries/economies, Ukrainian students felt less confident in their capacity to motivate themselves during the COVID-19 pandemic. This might also hold lessons for the current situation, indicating an area of self-directed learning in which to support students.
Ukrainian principals express worrying levels of concern about their school infrastructure and educational materials, which indicates an area to address in order to support learning in the current context. Rebuilding the country’s educational infrastructure will be an important aspect of providing the basis for quality learning.
Parents and families seem to be an important resource to draw on to support student learning. While parental involvement as measured by PISA has dropped over time, it remains relatively high in Ukrainian regions. Ukrainian students also perceive their family as more supportive than the average OECD student and greater family support positively correlates with student performance.
As explained in Chapter 1, these insights are drawn from 18 of the country’s 27 regions that participated in PISA 2022. While PISA 2022 was meant to include Ukraine’s entire educational system, this was not possible in the context of the war. The results can be deemed reliable for reporting, although comparisons with previous data require caution. For more information on data collection limitations in Ukraine, see Box 1.3 in Chapter 1 of this report.
Source: OECD (forthcoming[7]), Report on Ukraine, OECD Publishing, Paris.
As shown in Chapter 2, the performance of 15-year-olds in EaP countries/economies places them below the average PISA performance in mathematics, reading and science. A main reason for this is the high proportion of students who do not demonstrate basic proficiency in these subjects. The share of students in EaP countries/economies not reaching basic competencies in reading is of particular concern, and even more so for boys, especially in Baku and Georgia. While some EaP countries/economies have seen progress in their performance since joining PISA, this has also been uneven, even before the declines during the COVID-19 pandemic. Between 2018 and 2022, performance declined in three out of four EaP countries/economies. Baku, Moldova and Ukrainian regions.
These findings show a clear need to improve student performance across the board and, most urgently, to reduce the large number of students not reaching baseline proficiency levels. Indeed, reaching the European Education Area European Union-level targets to lower the proportion of students with low achievement to less than 15% by 2030 will require a significant effort in EaP systems, from halving the present rate in Ukrainian regions to reducing it fivefold in Baku.
The potential rewards are, however, significant. High-quality education is associated with a wide range of economic and social benefits for both individuals and societies in terms of productivity, earnings, public health and citizenship (OECD, 2022[8]). Reducing low performance helps improve young people’s later success in their further studies or in the labour market and brings important economic gains to countries and economies. While estimates rely on important assumptions, OECD analyses suggest that the potential economic gains from achieving universal basic skills for middle-income countries average more than eight times their current gross domestic product (GDP). For Georgia – the EaP country with available data – the analysis suggests that helping every student acquire basic skills could increase more than fivefold its GDP (OECD, 2015[9]).
PISA has shown that reducing the share of low-performing students is possible and can be accomplished relatively quickly. Countries as diverse as Germany, Mexico and Türkiye have effectively reduced their share of low performers in mathematics over the course of their participation in PISA. As their experience shows, improving the performance of all students requires universal policies that are applied across the system (OECD, 2016[3]; 2018[10]; 2023[11]). For EaP countries/economies, three key priorities stand out from this report’s analysis that could help lift performance overall: increasing the level of public investments, developing and raising the status of the teaching profession and creating good learning environments.
Increasing public investment in school education
Policy makers in EaP systems need to prioritise tackling low educational performance in their public policy agendas and support this priority with additional educational resources. As highlighted in Chapter 1, educational spending per student in all EaP countries remains relatively low. EaP countries/economies are among those countries where additional levels of spending could make a difference in learning outcomes. The share of public spending dedicated to education in EaP countries and economies has been improving in some but not all of them, ranging between 10.8% in Azerbaijan and 12.5% in Georgia to 14.3% in Ukraine and 16.3% in Moldova. Only Moldova meets the national benchmark set for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of spending a minimum of 15% of government expenditure on education by 2025 (UNESCO UIS, 2024[12]; 2024[13]). In Azerbaijan, the share of public expenditure dedicated to education actually fell by 11 percentage points between 2000 and 2020, a time when general government revenue increased by 12 percentage points (UNESCO, 2023[14]).
Since it will take time to mobilise additional public resources, the resources that are available need to be spent effectively (that is, achieving intended goals) and efficiently (minimising waste). PISA data suggest some effectiveness in spending in EaP countries/economies. Their performance is roughly what would be expected based on their per student spending, and in some cases, it is higher, namely in Baku and Georgia. However, countries could identify and address areas of inefficiency to liberate resources for strategies to raise overall performance. For example, the school networks in Georgia and Moldova contain many small schools that create high fixed costs but do not necessarily support quality teaching and learning (Li et al., 2019[15]; OECD, 2023[16]). As the analysis in Chapter 3 indicates, small schools in both Georgia and Moldova are generally smaller than the OECD average. Students in these small schools tend to perform worse than those in large schools in both countries and also worse than those in medium-sized schools in Moldova. However, performance differences disappear once socio‑economic factors are considered, except when comparing small and large schools in Moldova. Further discussion on school network reform is provided in Building Block 4, focusing on improving learning opportunities for rural students.
Additional public investment in school education should include a significant investment in the teaching profession, given its importance in determining student outcomes, as suggested in the next recommendation. Moreover, there is also a clear need for increased investment in material and physical resources. Chapter 3 identifies shortages and quality concerns in these areas as significant issues across all EaP countries/economies. Given that misuse of spending on these resources poses a substantial risk, authorities should monitor the integrity of resource use. For example, integrity has been identified as an area of concern for Ukraine in the past. The related report provides suggestions on identifying and changing any policies that create incentives for the misuse of funds that are likely applicable to other EaP countries/economies (OECD, 2017[17]).
Developing and raising the status of the teaching profession
Low-performing students benefit most from having qualified, highly skilled teachers (OECD, 2016[3]) and EaP countries/economies could still do more to develop the profession. The status of teaching tends to be low and the profession fails to attract highly qualified candidates (OECD, 2023[16]). This is a particular issue in the context of teacher shortages, as this report indicates for Baku, or in contexts where the profession is ageing, as other data suggest for Georgia (OECD, 2019[18]). Reportedly, both issues are also of concern in Ukraine.
Policies to raise the profession’s status and improve teaching quality are complex and varied and will need to consider the contexts of EaP systems. They can include the establishment of new qualifications, training requirements and incentives to recruit and retain the most talented graduates (OECD, 2018[4]; 2019[19]), as planned in Moldova. As part of its Education Development Strategy 2030, the Ministry of Education, Culture and Research of Moldova is planning a comprehensive review of teachers’ careers and remuneration (OECD, 2023[16]). In designing their policies, EaP countries/economies could look to the experience of countries such as Estonia that have similarly sought to improve teachers’ status and satisfaction by increasing salaries and creating new development opportunities (OECD, 2020[20]).
Beyond attracting new entrants, EaP countries/economies could better support the current workforce in developing their skills. Data analysed for this report show that while students feel supported by their teachers at a level similar to OECD countries, the quality of this support could be improved. This involves supporting teachers in adopting student-centred pedagogies over traditional methods focused on rote learning. Particularly in countries like Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, the transition to competency-based curricula demands that teachers can individualise learning and use diagnostic assessments (OECD, 2023[16]; OECD/UNICEF, 2021[21]). In Georgia, the National Assessment and Examinations Centre has recently started developing national assessments in grades 6 and 10 to support this change in the coming years.
Additionally, teachers could be better equipped to integrate new technologies in teaching and learning. Despite the widespread use of digital devices in EaP systems, the report shows no association between digital resources and student performance after accounting for socio-economic factors. As a first step, this requires defining together with teachers and teacher educators what it means to be digitally competent and how to develop, evaluate and certify these teacher skills (OECD, 2015[22]). Estonia offers a good example with its digital competency framework for teachers, inspired by the European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators (see JRC (2017[23])). This framework includes an online self-assessment tool for teachers to pinpoint areas needing improvement. It is aligned with a student digital competency framework to provide a common language for digital teaching and learning. Moreover, Estonian teachers have access to various training opportunities to advance their digital skills, including peer learning programmes such as the Digital ABC initiative (OECD, 2023[24]).
Creating good learning environments
The analysis in this report underscores the need for EaP countries to adopt policies that support schools in creating environments conducive to learning. This includes truancy, lateness, “traditional” and digital forms of classroom distraction and, in Baku and Moldova, school safety.
School leadership is pivotal in establishing school climates that support learning and is an area that EaP countries/economies could still invest in further. There are rich examples from OECD practice and research on how to strengthen school leadership, such as with professional standards, training programmes and professional networks. Azerbaijan has already introduced principal standards and expanded the range of providers for school leader training to make training more relevant (Kazimzade, 2017[25]). EaP countries/economies could offer guidance on effective practices based on research to aid school leaders in developing positive learning environments. For example, to reduce digital distractions, guidance could be provided on designing and implementing cell phone bans for specific age groups together with teachers and students (OECD, 2023[26]).
Parents can play an important role in keeping students engaged in their learning and creating a positive school climate. Parental involvement in their children’s education has been a strong point in EaP countries/economies, though it has declined since the COVID-19 pandemic. As a first step, EaP countries/economies could explore the reasons behind this decline together with national parent organisations. National promotional campaigns could be developed to re-engage parents. Schools could guide parents in supporting their children and actively participating in the school community.
Regarding school safety, Baku and Moldova could similarly initially investigate the specific concerns of students. Targeted interventions could be developed, such as initiatives to foster a positive and friendly school environment, complemented by teacher training on implementing these initiatives. For issues related to road safety, specific measures could be considered, such as reducing or prohibiting traffic near schools during key times of the day to enhance safety (Burns and Gottschalk, 2020[27]).
By the time they reach 15 years of age, very few students in EaP countries/economies achieve academic excellence. The share of “top-performing” students in PISA 2022 (i.e. those who achieve Proficiency Levels 5 or 6 in mathematics, reading or science) was higher than 1% only in Ukrainian regions, where it was about 3%. For comparison, the share of top-performing students in mathematics is 9% on average across OECD countries, 13% in Japan and 41% in Singapore.
This virtual lack of top-performing students is worrisome because megatrends such as digitalisation and the transition to a low-carbon economy make advanced skills increasingly important in the global economy. This has real implications for the development strategies of EaP countries. For example, achieving economic diversification in Azerbaijan (Vusa, 2022[28]; World Bank, 2018[29]) or increasing productivity and competitiveness in Moldova (World Bank, 2023[30]) will require highly skilled professionals able to lead future research, development and innovation in the context of high rates of emigration of high-skilled labour.
From the analysis in this report, for EaP countries/economies, three key policy options stand out that could foster academic excellence and help students transition into high-skilled jobs: supporting students with high academic potential during compulsory education, improving the transition of secondary school graduates into tertiary education and ensuring that tertiary graduates have attractive job opportunities in the labour market.
Supporting students with high academic potential during compulsory education
Although all students have the potential to excel in education and should have opportunities to do so, strong and moderate performers in PISA 2022 are the students with the highest potential to benefit from policies that foster academic excellence in EaP countries. Few students in EaP countries and economies score at the highest proficiency levels in PISA. Still, the number of students showing “strong” performance in mathematics, reading and science, scoring at Proficiency Level 4, is not negligible (Table 5.1). Strong performers are students who demonstrate a high potential to become top performers. Furthermore, the share of students who display a “moderate” level of performance, i.e. who score at Proficiency Level 3, is substantial in EaP countries/economies. Moderate performers are students who have not only reached basic proficiency but demonstrate a range of more advanced additional skills which are associated with Proficiency Level 3. They are, therefore, well-positioned to take their academic achievement to a higher level.
One way to support students with high academic potential is with acceleration and/or enrichment strategies. These allow students to learn at a faster pace and have access to richer curricular content and learning activities outside the classroom. They include, for example, differentiated pedagogies that meet the heterogeneous needs and interests of students using varied course content, activities and assessments (Moallemi, 2023[31]; Pozas and Schneider, 2019[32]; Dupriez, Dumay and Vause, 2008[33]). School-level strategies such as mentoring, counselling and student collaboration have also proven to be effective in creating meaningful learning experiences for students with high potential (Rutigliano and Quarshie, 2021[34]).
Percentage of students at Proficiency Level 3 (“moderate” performance) and Level 4 (“strong” performance) in mathematics, reading and science
Countries/economies are shown in descending order of the total percentage of students at Proficiency Level 3 and Level 4 in mathematics.
Source: OECD (2022[35]), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pisa-2022-database.html.
The success of these acceleration and enrichment strategies depends greatly on teachers’ and schools’ capacity to support talented and motivated students. Teacher capacity in this area can be built through initial teacher education and continuous professional development. In addition, policy makers can support teacher practice by making guidelines and orientation documents available to teachers.
Evidence from PISA also suggests that students who perform at the highest levels are dedicated, engaged and confident learners (OECD, 2009[36]). EaP countries/economies could explore ways to enhance students’ attitudes towards learning. High‑performing students tend to devote more time to studying than other students, especially at school. When not at school, they engage in learning-related activities relatively often. For example, many top performers in science regularly watch science programmes on television or read science magazines or science articles in newspapers. Also, top-performing students report that they enjoy learning, want to learn more and are motivated to do well.
Improving the transition of secondary school graduates into tertiary education
A large majority of students in EaP countries/economies expect to complete tertiary education. This partly reflects the significant increase in the proportion of students with these expectations since 2018 (except in Ukrainian regions, where this share declined but remains relatively high). On the one hand, high student expectations are a good thing since they indicate students’ motivation for continuing their studies after completing compulsory education. Students’ educational expectations can play a large role in shaping their future achievements (Nurmi, 2004[37]; Guyon and Huillery, 2020[38]). PISA has shown that students with higher educational expectations at age 15 are more likely to continue their studies and attain high‑skilled jobs than those with lower expectations, even after accounting for academic performance at age 15 (OECD, 2018[10]). Thus, high student expectations might facilitate the success of policies that foster academic excellence and ease the transition into tertiary education.
On the other hand, they raise important questions about the match between these aspirations and the actual opportunities for accessing and succeeding in tertiary education in EaP countries. In Georgia, for example, about 70% of the entire population of 15-year-olds expects to complete tertiary education,3 according to PISA data; however, only 42% graduated with a tertiary degree in 2022 (UNESCO UIS, 2024[39]). Thus, a substantial increase in the number of places available in tertiary institutions would be required to accommodate the growing demand. Furthermore, the contrast between students’ high educational aspirations and their actual academic performance is striking. Despite generally low scores on academic assessments, many students still aim for tertiary education. This gap between their aspirations and readiness could make it difficult for students to achieve their goals and succeed in tertiary education, resulting in dropout and high costs for individuals and society.
Quality counselling programmes can provide students with accurate information about academic requirements, financial costs and student aid for different pathways to improve the transition of secondary graduates into tertiary education. Advising students can help them to have a clearer idea of the paths available to them and empower them to make better choices for their future. EaP countries and economies could review how their existing counselling programmes fulfil these needs effectively. Moreover, the transition to tertiary education depends greatly on diverse offers at both secondary and tertiary levels – namely the development of professionally oriented tertiary education – and on the co‑ordination of the academic offer across the two levels of education. Another key factor is the relevance of the offer at the tertiary level for the labour market (OECD, 2020[40]).
Helping tertiary graduates transition into high-skilled jobs
Available evidence suggests that the labour market in EaP countries is not yet prepared to offer skilled jobs to a growing number of highly educated young people. For example, an analysis of skills mismatch shows that at least one in four tertiary graduates held jobs requiring lower formal qualifications (i.e. semi-skilled occupations) in Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine (ETF, 2020[41]). Over‑skilling is higher among young tertiary graduates in all of these countries. Labour market policies to support the transition from education to work could prevent an increase in the mismatch between education, skills and job requirements. In the context of Ukraine, aligning tertiary education with the labour market and economy will be important to support the country’s recovery and reconstruction needs.
Chapter 2 analysed students’ interest in two specific occupational fields: information and communication technology (ICT) and healthcare. These insights could guide strategies to create opportunities in high-demand fields and increase the supply of skilled labour in areas of low demand. The analysis suggests that interest in pursuing professional careers in ICT among 15-year-olds in EaP countries is generally high and increasing, whereas interest in healthcare professions is declining. Developing opportunities for young people to acquire ICT skills and enter this field could be a promising strategy. Conversely, it is important to understand why interest in healthcare professions is waning and to develop strategies to rekindle students’ interest in this sector, especially in the context of ageing societies.
Baku is an exception, with a high interest in health-related professions and a low and declining interest in ICT-related careers. This might be related to the structure of the economy and labour market opportunities. Given the limited interest in ICT, Azerbaijan might consider implementing science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics (STEAM) initiatives in schools to broaden the appeal of these fields.
There is a clear need to target support for disadvantaged students. Disparities in student performance by socio-economic status are pervasive in EaP countries/economies, even if somewhat smaller than on average across OECD countries (see Chapter 3). In mathematics, for example, advantaged students outperformed their disadvantaged peers by more than 50 score points – the equivalent of almost 2 years of schooling – in all EaP countries/economies. Policies in EaP countries/economies should aim to dismantle the barriers to learning faced by disadvantaged students. The high share of disadvantaged students who already perform among the highest performing students in their education system in EaP countries/economies suggests that such policies have a real chance to succeed, between 10% and 14% of 15-year-old students in EaP countries/economies compared to 10% on OECD average, as shown in Chapter 3.
While countries need to take into account the multiple risk factors faced by disadvantaged students that are specific to their context, EaP countries/economies could tap into three policy options: promoting equity through school funding, investing in high-quality early childhood education and care, and promoting positive attitudes towards learning among disadvantaged students.
Promoting equity through school funding
School funding systems have an important role to play in equalising chances for learning for students from disadvantaged backgrounds (OECD, 2022[8]; 2017[42]). EaP countries/economies could review how their funding systems promote equity. There is some evidence that school funding is not always designed to best promotes equity in EaP countries/economies. In Georgia, for example, an ongoing research project supported by the World Bank aims to replace the current financing model to ensure adequate funding, particularly for disadvantaged students, to support teacher development and provide up-to-date educational resources for the implementation of the new competency-based curriculum. The reform seeks to address known issues in the existing system that does not adequately consider the additional needs of disadvantaged schools (Li et al., 2019[15]), which might help explain why disadvantaged and rural students in Georgia report access to fewer and poorer quality educational and digital resources. Disparities in educational resources are also apparent in Ukrainian regions, although the extent to which these are linked to the school funding mechanism is unclear, also bearing in mind the specific context of the war. Finally, the report suggests inequities in the availability of assisting staff in Baku and Georgia.
Targeted programmes are one way to compensate for disadvantages, especially if they are combined with a stable funding allocation that is based on a well-designed funding formula. While a funding formula that includes weightings for the characteristics of the student body of the school can promote both equity and transparency, targeted programmes can provide multidimensional support to address the multifaceted needs of disadvantaged students (OECD, 2017[42]; 2021[43]). In Ireland, for example, the Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools programme provides participating schools with priority access to a range of support programmes such as teacher professional development, the School Meals Programme and the Home School Community Liaison Services Scheme that aim to build a positive relationship between families and schools (OECD, 2024[44]).
Investing in high-quality early childhood education and care
Some EaP systems still need to further expand the provision of high-quality early childhood education and care (ECEC) for all children, especially those from disadvantaged families. ECEC is critical for more equitable educational opportunities because disparities in performance related to socio‑economic status develop early and widen throughout students’ lives (OECD, 2018[10]). Coupling ECEC interventions with health, nutrition and parent-involvement services can deliver substantial lifelong benefits for students, including higher educational attainment and career achievement, reduced criminal activity, better health and stronger family and personal relationships (Conti, Heckman and Pinto, 2016[45]; García, Heckman and Ronda, 2023[46]).
EaP countries have taken steps to improve participation in early learning. For example, the 2009 Education Law was the first to include pre-school education in Azerbaijan. Since then, pre-school education has been a priority for the Ministry of Science and Education of Azerbaijan, with the creation of many new pre-school places (World Bank, 2020[47]). However, except for Moldova, where all children from age 3 are expected to be in pre‑primary education, participation in ECEC in EaP countries remains behind targets set by the European Union for the European Education Area. These targets aim for at least 96% of children aged 3 to start compulsory primary education to participate in ECEC by 2030.
A comprehensive policy to expand the provision of ECEC in EaP countries/economies might start by funding the development of more ECEC places to meet demand while allocating sufficient resources to support quality, including through the development and training of early childhood educators. This can be supported by progressive funding systems that give greater priority to the public funding of the early years.
Promoting positive attitudes towards learning among disadvantaged students
EaP countries/economies might also consider policies that promote positive attitudes towards learning among disadvantaged students. Resilient students are more motivated to learn academic subjects, are more engaged with them and have greater self-confidence in their ability to learn (OECD, 2011[48]). As findings from the OECD Survey on Social and Emotional Skills show, positive attitudes are associated with better performance in reading and mathematics in Ukrainian regions. While these socio‑emotional skills are important in themselves, they also matter in improving performance (OECD, 2024[49]).
Policy tools that can be used to promote these kinds of positive attitudes include programmes designed to increase disadvantaged students’ confidence in their academic abilities. For example, these programmes can challenge false perceptions of inability among disadvantaged students and teach instead that intellectual abilities can be developed (i.e. a growth mindset) (Yeager et al., 2019[50]). Career guidance can also be an important area in which to raise awareness of the importance of education and its benefits. Programmes that facilitate interactions between disadvantaged students and individuals who work in scientific industries may help disadvantaged students believe they can do well in school and use what they have learnt in their real life outside of school. For example, high-quality mentoring programmes have been shown to be beneficial, particularly for disadvantaged students (DuBois et al., 2002[51]). In all EaP countries/economies, disadvantaged students are less likely to expect to complete a tertiary degree than their advantaged peers, indicating low aspirations. These types of specific interventions could be integrated into existing initiatives. In Georgia, for example, all schools are now required to develop support programmes to assist students with low achievement who are often from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Finally, scholarships for disadvantaged students that reward academic achievement can be a way to shape students’ attitudes to learning and raise their aspirations. In Colombia, for example, a scholarship programme supported the best students from the most disadvantaged households to access tertiary education. The programme contributed to reducing the socio-economic gap in access to tertiary education and improving the performance of disadvantaged students in the final school leaving examination, influencing students’ efforts and attitudes to learning (Radinger et al., 2018[52]).
In all EaP countries/economies except Baku, a large share of students sampled in PISA attend schools in rural areas and these students perform worse than their urban peers. Rural-urban gaps in performance are particularly pronounced in Moldova, the country with the second-highest share of rural students in PISA 2022. Extrapolating from long‑term trends in the share of the rural population, the share of rural students is likely to remain high in the country (World Bank, 2024[53]).
In Baku, the number of rural students in the PISA sample is very small by design. However, when Azerbaijan participated in PISA 2009 as a country, a sizeable share of the students attended a rural school. More recent data show that while the share of the rural population has been declining, still 42% of the population lives in rural areas (World Bank, 2024[53]). Other analysis likewise points to disparities in poverty and educational outcomes between rural and urban areas in Azerbaijan (World Bank, 2020[47]). Therefore, the lessons shared in this recommendation are relevant to all EaP countries, including Azerbaijan.
To improve learning opportunities for rural students, EaP countries could consider designing a targeted policy for rural education in consultation with rural communities. Each rural context is unique and, even within rural areas, there are different needs, from remote schools to rural schools at the urban fringe. Still, there are insights from international experience that EaP countries/economies could learn from. A rural education policy in EaP countries/economies could incorporate three aspects:
Connecting rural education policies with other mutually reinforcing regional and economic development policies. In many countries, including EaP countries/economies, disadvantages in learning opportunities for rural students overlap with their socio-economic disadvantage. Improving the chances of rural students benefits from integrating interventions for rural education with other policies, such as regional development and innovation policies. For example, vocational education can support the development of specific economic sectors in rural areas by supplying the skills businesses need to operate. Integrating entrepreneurship education in rural schools can support the creation of local businesses (Echazarra and Radinger, 2019[54]).
Exploiting the potential of digital technologies. The benefits of digital technologies for student learning depend on teachers’ capacity to engage with these tools, as highlighted above. For rural schools, however, digital tools can make up for shortcomings that are otherwise difficult to address, such as offering student enrichment courses or opportunities for professional exchange for teachers. These might otherwise not be available due to the small size of schools (Echazarra and Radinger, 2019[54]). However, as the analysis of the PISA data for this report shows, the potential of digital technologies currently seems to be underutilised in some EaP countries/economies, such as Georgia and Moldova. In both countries, PISA data suggest disparities in digital resources between rural and urban schools. A first step would be to equalise access to digital resources.
Reviewing the organisation of the school network. Rural education policies also need to consider strategies for organising rural school networks. As highlighted above, small schools, which make up a large share of rural schools in both countries, tend to perform worse than large schools, although performance differences can be accounted for to a large extent by generally students’ and schools’ socio-economic profiles (Figure 5.2). School network reorganisation strategies must ultimately demonstrate that they benefit rural students. When engaging in reorganisation, countries need to draw on a broad spectrum of strategies, from resource sharing and co‑operation to clustering and consolidation, involve local communities and consider student transportation (OECD, 2018[5]). Moldova has already committed to reorganising its school network as part of its Education Development Strategy 2030 (OECD, 2023[16]).
Differences in mathematics performance between students in large and small schools, before and after accounting for socio-economic profile of students and schools
Notes: Statistically significant score changes are shown in a darker tone.
Countries and economies are ranked in ascending order of score difference in mathematics performance between students in large and small schools before accounting for students’ and schools’ socio-economic profiles.
Source: OECD (2022[35]), PISA 2022 Database, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pisa-2022-database.html.
In EaP education systems, linguistic diversity is more prevalent than diversity by immigrant background. PISA data indicate that students from minority language backgrounds in Georgia and Moldova struggle academically, partly due to lower socio-economic conditions. In Baku and Ukrainian regions, PISA 2022 does not show significant differences in mathematics performance by students’ language background.
To support these students, both Georgia and Moldova have implemented various programmes. For over two decades, Georgia has prioritised education for minority integration, introducing bilingual teaching and improved second language textbooks (Burduli, 2021[55]). Moldova has also provided intercultural training for teachers and educational materials in minority languages (Council of Europe, 2023[56]). Despite these efforts, learning disparities persist, suggesting the need for additional measures, such as:
Enhancing initial teacher education to include cultural anthropology, social psychology, child cognitive development and second language acquisition for teachers. Existing teachers could benefit from professional development in equity, inclusion and diversity to better engage with students and parents from minority backgrounds (OECD, 2023[57]). Some countries, recognising the importance of preparing teachers for diverse student backgrounds, have reformed their teacher education programmes. For example, Denmark now requires all teachers to be trained in special needs and second language instruction (OECD, 2019[19]). This can also improve the communication between teachers and parents who speak a different language (Lawal, 2021[58]).
Employing dedicated support staff, such as bilingual assistants, to address the language needs of students whose first language is not the school’s language of instruction. These staff can collaborate with teachers in a co-teaching model to tailor instruction to all learners, including those from minority language backgrounds (OECD, 2023[57]; Masdeu Navarro, 2015[59]).
To ensure all students, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds, reach a minimum skill level, they must first access and successfully complete their secondary education. In EaP countries/economies, education coverage (i.e. the proportion of 15-year-olds who are enrolled in school at Grade 7 or above) is nearly universal in Moldova, but in Baku and Georgia, over 10% of 15-year-olds are not enrolled in school, though Georgia has shown improvement over time. Both countries/economies need to reinforce efforts to ensure all 15-year-olds have access to secondary education.
Improving secondary school enrolment may involve various policy measures, such as improving the quality of earlier education stages. Students who struggle early are at a higher risk of dropping out before reaching secondary education. In Baku, it is particularly important to ensure timely school entry, as a high percentage of students report starting school at age 7, indicating early entry challenges. Additionally, the design of the school system and economic support for students and their families play important roles in student progression and completion rates. Several options exist for Baku and Georgia to consider:
Extending compulsory schooling: Baku could increase the compulsory schooling age, which currently ends at 15 years, the earliest among EaP systems and earlier than most OECD systems. While extending compulsory education, as seen in Georgia, which goes until age 18, signals the importance of schooling, it alone may not sufficiently boost secondary school enrolment.
Strengthening vocational education and training (VET): Both Baku and Georgia could improve the quality and relevance of their VET programmes in secondary education. Offering diverse educational pathways is essential to cater to different learner types, including those who struggle academically (Stronati, 2023[60]). Developing skills needed to transition to green and digital economies is also important. However, vocational options in both Baku and Georgia appear to be underdeveloped. The low share of vocational students in the PISA sample also evidences this. Both countries/economies have recognised VET as a priority, implementing policies to better involve employers, elevate VET status and upgrade the skills of VET trainers (Majidova and Petrivska, 2023[61]; MoESCS, 2020[62]). While difficult to replicate, well-developed VET systems such as Germany and Switzerland could provide inspiration for strengthening VET and creating strong work-based learning opportunities.
Implementing conditional cash transfers (CCTs): Baku and Georgia could introduce CCTs to encourage participation in secondary education. Given that poverty is a major barrier to educational engagement – disadvantaged students face higher levels of socio‑economic challenges in both Baku and Georgia compared to the OECD average – CCTs could mitigate some of the financial obstacles preventing youth from continuing their education. Evidence from other middle-income countries shows that CCTs significantly increase enrolment and attendance while reducing dropout rates, particularly in secondary education (García and Saavedra, 2017[63]).
Even though more than half of students in EaP countries/economies report positive well-being as measured by their sense of belonging at school, students’ sense of belonging at school is weaker in EaP countries/economies than on average across OECD countries. This is particularly acute when it comes to student loneliness (e.g. a higher share of students reporting “I feel lonely at school”) and social ties (a lower share of students reporting “other students seem to like me”). In addition, disparities in the sense of belonging by student background exist in all EaP countries/economies. Socio‑economically disadvantaged students are less likely to feel they belong at school than advantaged students and girls’ sense of belonging at school is lower than boys’ (except in Ukrainian regions).
Monitoring student well-being in EaP systems going forward will be important because education systems can make a difference in students’ overall development and quality of life. Children in school spend a considerable amount of time in their classrooms, socialising with classmates and interacting with teachers and other school staff. Therefore, how connected they feel to others at school is key to understanding student well-being in its social dimension. Students who feel that they are part of and are accepted by a school community report that their life has more meaning (Juvonen, 2006[64]) and are also less likely to engage in risky behaviours such as substance abuse and truancy (Currie et al., 2012[65]; Resnick, 1997[66]; Schulenberg et al., 1994[67]). As EaP countries continue to participate in PISA, they could monitor trends in student well-being over time using the wide range of measures that the survey provides.
In addition to system-level monitoring, policy makers in EaP countries/economies could promote and support school- and classroom-level practices that bolster student well-being. Evidence-based interventions to promote student well-being include the following:
Interventions to develop quality teacher-student relationships can effectively foster students’ social, psychological and cognitive well-being outcomes (Borman et al., 2021[68]; Cook et al., 2018[69]; Gehlbach et al., 2016[70]). Effective practices include praise, reflective and supportive listening and coaching and validating emotions, among many others (Kincade, Cook and Goerdt, 2020[71]). Training teachers in this area can greatly support teacher-student relationships (Schonert-Reichl, 2017[72]).
Interventions and initiatives that nurture friendships among students at school can also lead to greater well-being in students, including happiness and life satisfaction, belonging, socio‑emotional skills, and mental and physical health (Roffey, 2011[73]; Demir et al., 2010[74]; Holder and Coleman, 2007[75]; Thomas, da Cunha and Santo, 2022[76]; Thomas, da Cunha and Santo, 2022[76]; Barker and Galambos, 2003[77]).
Programmes to develop students’ social-emotional skills can boost well-being of students of all ages (Bonell et al., 2018[78]; Sklad et al., 2012[79]; Taylor et al., 2017[80]; Wigelsworth et al., 2016[81]). Features that make such programmes more effective are a significant teacher training component, multiple sessions and reinforcement of social-emotional skills both in the curriculum and teacher-student interactions.
References
[77] Barker, E. and N. Galambos (2003), “Body dissatisfaction of adolescent girls and boys”, Journal of Early Adolescence, Vol. 23/2, pp. 141-165, https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431603023002002.
[78] Bonell, C. et al. (2018), “Effects of the Learning Together intervention on bullying and aggression in English secondary schools (INCLUSIVE): A cluster randomised controlled trial”, The Lancet, Vol. 392/10163, pp. 2452-2464, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)31782-3.
[68] Borman, T. et al. (2021), “Impacting 9th grade educational outcomes: Results from a multisite randomized controlled trial of the BARR model”, Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, Vol. 14/4, pp. 812-834, https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2021.1917027.
[55] Burduli, T. (2021), The Language Barrier: The Ongoing Challenge to Provide Decent Education to Georgia’s Minority Schoolchildren, Civil Georgia, Tiblisi.
[27] Burns, T. and F. Gottschalk (eds.) (2020), Education in the Digital Age: Healthy and Happy Children, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1209166a-en.
[45] Conti, G., J. Heckman and R. Pinto (2016), “The effects of two influential early childhood interventions on health and healthy behaviour”, The Economic Journal, Vol. 126/596, pp. F28-F65, https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12420.
[56] Council of Europe (2023), Fifth Opinion on the Republic of Moldova Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, Council of Europe Secretariat of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities , Strasbourg, https://rm.coe.int/5th-op-moldova-en/1680acf5c8.
[69] Curby, T. (ed.) (2018), “Cultivating positive teacher-student relationships: Preliminary evaluation of the establish-maintain-restore (EMR) method”, School Psychology Review, Vol. 47/3, pp. 226-243, https://doi.org/10.17105/spr-2017-0025.v47-3.
[65] Currie, C. et al. (eds.) (2012), “Social determinants of health and well-being among young people”, in Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children (HBSC) Study: International Report from the 2009/2010 Survey, World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe.
[74] Demir, M. et al. (2010), “I matter to my friend, therefore I am happy: Friendship, mattering, and happiness”, Journal of Happiness Studies, Vol. 12/6, pp. 983-1005, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-010-9240-8.
[51] DuBois, D. et al. (2002), “Effectiveness of mentoring programs for youth: A meta‐analytic review”, American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 30/2, pp. 157-197, https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1014628810714.
[33] Dupriez, V., X. Dumay and A. Vause (2008), “How do school systems manage pupils’ heterogeneity?”, Comparative Education Review, Vol. 52/2, pp. 245-273, https://doi.org/10.1086/528764.
[54] Echazarra, A. and T. Radinger (2019), “Learning in rural schools: Insights from PISA, TALIS and the literature”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 196, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8b1a5cb9-en.
[41] ETF (2020), Skills Mismatch in ETF Partner Countries: Cross-country Report, European Training Foundation, Turin, https://www.etf.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2022-08/Skills%20Mismatch%20Measurement_final%20report_EN.pdf.
[46] García, J., J. Heckman and V. Ronda (2023), “The lasting effects of early-childhood education on promoting the skills and social mobility of disadvantaged African Americans and their children”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 131/6, pp. 1477-1506, https://doi.org/10.1086/722936.
[63] García, S. and J. Saavedra (2017), “Educational impacts and cost-effectiveness of conditional cash transfer programs in developing countries: A meta-analysis”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 87/5, pp. 921-965, https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317723008.
[70] Gehlbach, H. et al. (2016), “Creating birds of similar feathers: Leveraging similarity to improve teacher–student relationships and academic achievement”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 108/3, pp. 342-352, https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000042.
[38] Guyon, N. and E. Huillery (2020), “Biased aspirations and social inequality at school: Evidence from French teenagers”, The Economic Journal, Vol. 131/634, pp. 745-796, https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/ueaa077.
[75] Holder, M. and B. Coleman (2007), “The contribution of social relationships to children’s happiness”, Journal of Happiness Studies, Vol. 10/3, pp. 329-349, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-007-9083-0.
[23] JRC (2017), European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators – DigCompEdu, Joint Research Centre, European Commission, https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC107466.
[64] Juvonen, J. (2006), “Sense of belonging, social bonds, and school functioning”, in Alexander, P. and P. Winne (eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
[25] Kazimzade, E. (2017), School Principalship Developments in Azerbaijan: Challenges of Professional Development of School Leaders vs. Managers, Network of Education Policy Centers, Zagreb.
[71] Kincade, L., C. Cook and A. Goerdt (2020), “Meta-analysis and common practice elements of universal approaches to improving student-teacher relationships”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 90/5, pp. 710-748, https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320946836.
[58] Lawal, A. (2021), “How teachers can communicate effectively with parents who speak a different language”, International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, Vol. 4/9, pp. 166-178, https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2021.4.9.17.
[15] Li, R. et al. (2019), OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education: Georgia, OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/94dc370e-en.
[61] Majidova, M. and E. Petrivska (2023), Contribution of Partner Countries to EU Youth Wiki Chapter III: Azerbaijan Employment and Entrepreneurship, https://pjp-eu.coe.int/documents/42128013/246625197/Azerbaijan+Chapter+III.pdf/f3a49d3f-b176-f030-ad12-44562cc5dfb5?t=1705332375018.
[59] Masdeu Navarro, F. (2015), “Learning support staff: A literature review”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 125, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5jrnzm39w45l-en.
[31] Moallemi, R. (2023), “The relationship between differentiated instruction and learner levels of engagement at university”, Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching and Learning, Vol. 17/1, pp. 21-46, https://doi.org/10.1108/jrit-07-2022-0041.
[62] MoESCS (2020), Vocational Education Reform 2020 Report, Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sport of Georgia.
[37] Nurmi, J. (2004), “Socialization and self‐development: Channeling, selection, adjustment, and reflection”, in Handbook of Adolescent Psychology, Second Edition, Wiley, https://doi.org/10.1002/9780471726746.ch4.
[44] OECD (2024), OECD Review of Resourcing Schools to Address Educational Disadvantage in Ireland, Reviews of National Policies for Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3433784c-en.
[49] OECD (2024), Social and Emotional Skills for Better Lives: Findings from the OECD Survey on Social and Emotional Skills 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/35ca7b7c-en.
[16] OECD (2023), “An assessment of the professional development of teachers and school leaders, and curriculum and learning resources in Moldova”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, No. 78, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/22633a40-en.
[57] OECD (2023), Equity and Inclusion in Education: Finding Strength through Diversity, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e9072e21-en.
[24] OECD (2023), “Estonia”, in Country Digital Education Ecosystems and Governance: A Companion to Digital Education Outlook 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d8c17cce-en.
[11] OECD (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en.
[26] OECD (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume II): Learning During – and From – Disruption, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a97db61c-en.
[35] OECD (2022), PISA 2022 Database, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/pisa-2022-database.html.
[8] OECD (2022), Value for Money in School Education: Smart Investments, Quality Outcomes, Equal Opportunities, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f6de8710-en.
[43] OECD (2021), “Towards equity in school funding policies”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, No. 41, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6a3d127a-en.
[20] OECD (2020), “Education Policy Outlook in Estonia”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives, No. 13, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9d472195-en.
[40] OECD (2020), Labour Market Relevance and Outcomes of Higher Education in Four US States: Ohio, Texas, Virginia and Washington, Higher Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/38361454-en.
[18] OECD (2019), TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en.
[19] OECD (2019), Working and Learning Together: Rethinking Human Resource Policies for Schools, OECD Reviews of School Resources, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b7aaf050-en.
[4] OECD (2018), Effective Teacher Policies: Insights from PISA, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264301603-en.
[10] OECD (2018), Equity in Education: Breaking Down Barriers to Social Mobility, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264073234-en.
[5] OECD (2018), Responsive School Systems: Connecting Facilities, Sectors and Programmes for Student Success, OECD Reviews of School Resources, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264306707-en.
[17] OECD (2017), OECD Reviews of Integrity in Education: Ukraine 2017, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264270664-en.
[42] OECD (2017), The Funding of School Education: Connecting Resources and Learning, OECD Reviews of School Resources, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264276147-en.
[3] OECD (2016), Low-Performing Students: Why They Fall Behind and How To Help Them Succeed, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264250246-en.
[22] OECD (2015), Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555-en.
[9] OECD (2015), Universal Basic Skills: What Countries Stand to Gain, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264234833-en.
[1] OECD (2013), Synergies for Better Learning: An International Perspective on Evaluation and Assessment, OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264190658-en.
[48] OECD (2011), Against the Odds: Disadvantaged Students Who Succeed in School, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264090873-en.
[6] OECD (2011), “Improving Performance: Leading from the Bottom”, PISA in Focus, No. 2, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5k9h362shtlr-en.
[2] OECD (2011), “Lessons for the United States”, in Lessons from PISA for the United States, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264096660-12-en.
[36] OECD (2009), Top of the Class: High Performers in Science in PISA 2006, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264060777-en.
[7] OECD (forthcoming), Report on Ukraine, OECD Publishing, Paris.
[21] OECD/UNICEF (2021), “Eastern Europe and Central Asia participation and outcomes in PISA 2018”, in Education in Eastern Europe and Central Asia: Findings from PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d2db6cb0-en.
[32] Pozas, M. and C. Schneider (2019), “Shedding light on the convoluted terrain of differentiated instruction (DI): Proposal of a DI taxonomy for the heterogeneous classroom”, Open Education Studies, Vol. 1/1, pp. 73-90, https://doi.org/10.1515/edu-2019-0005.
[52] Radinger, T. et al. (2018), OECD Reviews of School Resources: Colombia 2018, OECD Reviews of School Resources, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264303751-en.
[66] Resnick, M. (1997), “Protecting adolescents from harm. Findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health”, Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 278/10, pp. 823-832, https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.278.10.823.
[73] Roffey, S. (2011), “Developing positive relationships in schools”, in Positive Relationships, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2147-0_9.
[34] Rutigliano, A. and N. Quarshie (2021), “Policy approaches and initiatives for the inclusion of gifted students in OECD countries”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 262, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c3f9ed87-en.
[72] Schonert-Reichl, K. (2017), “Social and emotional learning and teachers”, The Future of Children, Vol. 27/1, pp. 137-155, https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2017.0007.
[67] Schulenberg, J. et al. (1994), “High school educational success and subsequent substance use: A panel analysis following adolescents into young adulthood”, Journal of Health and Social Behavior, Vol. 35/1, p. 45, https://doi.org/10.2307/2137334.
[79] Sklad, M. et al. (2012), “Effectiveness of school‐based universal social, emotional, and behavioral programs: Do they enhance students’ development in the area of skill, behavior, and adjustment?”, Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 49/9, pp. 892-909, https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21641.
[60] Stronati, C. (2023), “The design of upper secondary education across OECD countries: Managing choice, coherence and specialisation”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 288, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/158101f0-en.
[80] Taylor, R. et al. (2017), “Promoting positive youth development through school‐based social and emotional learning interventions: A meta‐analysis of follow‐up effects”, Child Development, Vol. 88/4, pp. 1156-1171, https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12864.
[76] Thomas, K., J. da Cunha and J. Santo (2022), “Changes in character virtues are driven by classroom relationships: A longitudinal study of elementary school children”, School Mental Health, Vol. 14/2, pp. 266-277, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-022-09511-8.
[14] UNESCO (2023), Global Education Monitoring Report 2023: Technology in Education: A Tool on Whose Terms?, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, https://doi.org/10.54676/uzqv8501.
[39] UNESCO UIS (2024), Gross Graduation Ratio from Tertiary Education, UNESCO Institute for Statistics, https://data.uis.unesco.org/index.aspx?queryid=3817 (accessed on 8 August 2024).
[12] UNESCO UIS (2024), SDG 4 Data Explorer, UNESCO Institute for Statistics, https://sdg4-data.uis.unesco.org/ (accessed on 1 July 2024).
[13] UNESCO UIS (2024), SDG 4 Scorecard Dashboard, UNESCO Institute for Statistics, https://www.unesco.org/en/sdg4scorecard-dashboard.
[28] Vusa, G. (2022), “Exploring economic diversification in Azerbaijan”, Harvard Kennedy School Building State Capability Blog.
[81] Wigelsworth, M. et al. (2016), “The impact of trial stage, developer involvement and international transferability on universal social and emotional learning programme outcomes: A meta-analysis”, Cambridge Journal of Education, Vol. 46/3, pp. 347-376, https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764x.2016.1195791.
[53] World Bank (2024), World Bank Open Data, World Bank, Washington, DC, https://data.worldbank.org (accessed on 1 July 2024).
[30] World Bank (2023), Moldova - Country Partnership Framework for the Period FY23-FY27 (English), World Bank Group, Washington, DC, http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/099350101102317579/BOSIB0d902e69802c0ba0c04ec91579296a.
[47] World Bank (2020), Survive, Learn, Thrive: Strategic Human Capital Investments to Accelerate Azerbaijan’s Growth, World Bank, Washington, DC, http://hdl.handle.net/10986/34514.
[29] World Bank (2018), Azerbaijan: The Role of Higher Education in Innovation, World Bank Group, Washington, DC, https://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/496791540241839037/pdf/Policy-Note-Azerbaijan-The-Role-of-Higher-Education-in-Innovation-Oct-2018.pdf.
[50] Yeager, D. et al. (2019), “A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement”, Nature, Vol. 573/7774, pp. 364-369, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1466-y.
← 1. The EaP countries/economies forming part of this report are Baku in Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova and 18 of the 27 regions in Ukraine. Any reference to EaP countries/economies, as well as the EaP average, specifically pertains to Baku, Georgia, Moldova and Ukrainian regions. Armenia is also part of the European Union EaP but has not yet participated in PISA, although participation is underway for PISA 2025.
← 2. Azerbaijan as a whole country participated in PISA 2006 and PISA 2009, 2006 but has only participated with its capital city, Baku, since PISA 2018.
← 3. Eighty-six percent of students in Georgia reported that they expect to complete higher education in PISA 2022. However, the coverage of the PISA sample in Georgia is 82%. If we consider 15-year-olds who are not in PISA, then about 71% of 15-year-olds in Georgia expect to complete higher education (0.86*0.82=0.7052).