A comparative analysis of educational equity in Australia and Canada – the power of education policy Institute of Educational Research Charles University, Prague June 17, 2013 Laura Perry School of Education, Murdoch University Perth AUSTRALIA

The Australian economy & society Dynamic and prosperous economy, large natural resources, low unemployment, large labour shortages Multicultural; high levels of immigration; “advantaged” immigrants Decent social welfare, national health insurance, income transfers, low(ish) poverty, moderate income inequality Very high quality of life for most citizens, UNDP, low crime, world’s most liveable cities, long life expectancy, etc.

The Australian education system  Generally high quality, strong results on PISA  Concerns about equity; 3 main equity groups are rural, indigenous, and low SES students  Comprehensive system of education  Constructivist/progressive philosophy

Structural aspects of the education system  National curriculum and standardised testing  Public league table reporting  High levels of privatization: 40% of all secondary students  Some school choice within public sector  Low but growing levels of academic selection, probably around 5-10%  Centralized funding (state) for public schools  Public subsidies (plus fees) for private schools  High levels of school social segregation

Educational equity: between school differences  Theoretical ideal: it shouldn’t matter where one goes to school; between school differences should be minimal  Indicator: achievement gaps between low and high SES students and schools  How does this look in Australia, and for a comparator country like Canada?

Why compare with Canada?  Canada has a similar national context as Australia  Similar educational structures, philosophies and pedagogical approaches  One big difference – marketization of the education system  Canadian education system is high performing and equitable on PISA

Marketization of education in Australia and Canada  More variation/inequity in resources and funding to schools in Aus  More school choice in Aus 78% of schools require local attendance in Can vs. 42% in Aus (PISA 2009)  More privatization in Aus 38% in Aus, 6% in Canada attend a non-gov school (PISA 2009)  More league table reporting in Aus  More social segregation in Aus 35% attend a mixed school in Aus, 60% in Canada (PISA 2009)

#1: Achievement gaps by school and student SES  Secondary analysis of PISA 2006  Sample: approx. 22k Canadian and 14k Australian students  SES is very complex and rich; an advantage of PISA  Range of student SES is comparable (and even slightly larger in Canada) in the 2 countries

Summary of achievement gap findings  Gap between low and high SES students and schools is large in both countries, and especially in Australia Students  Canada= 70 pts; Australia = 83 pts Schools  Canada= 61 pts; Australia = 85 pts  Low SES students and schools perform better in Canada; high SES students the same; high SES schools better in Aus

 How much does it matter where you go to school?  Achievement scores by school SES context

Mean Math Performance for Low and High SES Students in Australia and Canada, across School SES Quintiles

Achievement gap between high and low SES schools

Conclusion I  Canada is more equitable  Canada shows that equity can be promoted without harming high SES students or reducing the number of high achieving students (proportion is the same in both countries)  Higher equity gives an overall higher country average on PISA

Conclusion II: Education policy matters!!  Substantial differences in educational equity between Canada and Australia  Not due to differences in culture or society or economy  Due to education policies; policy matters, even in low(ish)-poverty countries Inequalities in school funding Privatization and stratification between schools Choice, competition and league tables Result in social segregation  A positive message but a sobering one too

Policy and research recommendations for Australia  Need to decrease social segregation. How?  Equalize funding across schools?  Stop over-funding socially elite/exclusive schools?  What exactly is role of funding? Previous research says it plays little direct role but indirect role might be key.

Mean ESCS by Student-Level Quintiles for AUS, CAN and USA in PISA 2006