The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's International Early Learning Study: What's going on (original) (raw)
Related papers
Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 2020
This is the fourth colloquium for Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood on the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's International Early Learning and Child Well-being Study, and marks the recent publication by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development of reports on the first round of this study. In it, the authors discuss what the results tell us, what they do not and what might come next. They conclude by supporting the need for comparative studies of early childhood education, but argue that the International Early Learning and Child Well-being Study is not the way to go. Keywords early childhood education, International Early Learning and Child Well-being Study, international large-scale assessment, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development After four years of development work, testing 7000 children and spending millions of dollars, pounds and euros, the results of the first round of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD's) International Early Learning and Child Well-being Study (IELS) were published in March 2020 with three national reports-one for each participating country (England, Estonia and the USA)-a full report and a summary report (OECD, n.d. b). The main findings are also presented in a recording of a webinar (EduSkills OECD, 2020).
Policy Futures in Education , 2019
This special issue aims to bring critical perspectives to bear on a growing phenomenon in education: comparative assessment of educational performance using standardized measures of outcomes or ‘international large-scale assessments’. We focus on one of its latest examples: the International Early Learning and Child Well-being Study. Proposed by the Organisation for the Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD, n.d.a) in 2012, this study is now being put into practice, targeting early childhood education and young children in particular. The articles in this edited collection offer varied critiques of this project as well as critiques of the influential role that the OECD is playing in how member countries design, implement and assess their early childhood education.
The OECD's International Early Learning Study: what happened next
Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 2017
In this article, the authors provide an update on what has happened over recent months with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s proposal for an International Early Learning Study, and review responses to the proposed International Early Learning Study, including the concerns that have been raised about this new venture in international testing. The authors call on the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and its memberstate governments to enter into open discussion with the wider early childhood community about the future direction of comparative work on early childhood education and care.
Journal of Social Policy, 2013
There is a large consensus among international organisations (e.g., United Nations and the World Bank) in considering Early Childhood Care and Education a prominent policy to equalise opportunities. Moreover, it is common opinion that interventions in early childhood aiming at equalising 'opportunities' rather than 'outcomes' will overcome political dissent. These two claims draw upon a particular interpretation of the work of contemporary egalitarian philosophers, as well as a number of studies in both developed and developing countries, finding higher benefits for disadvantaged children. Despite the tradition of analysing welfare provision from an equality perspective, the shift towards early childhood education as an equality policy has not yet fully been analysed. We critically examine the consensus advocated by international organisations regarding Early Childhood Care and Education as key to 'levelling the playing field' and suggest that the first claim (early childhood as greatest equaliser) should be considered with caution. We also argue that the alleged consensus on this claim may lead to a depoliticisation of social policy.
Global education review, 2017
Global Education Review is a publication of The School of Education at Mercy College, New York. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Citation: Wasmuth, Helge & Nitecki, Elena (2017). Global early childhood policies: The impact of the global education reform movement and possibilities for reconceptualization. Global Education Review, 4 (2), 1-17. Global Early Childhood Policies: The Impact of the Global Education Reform Movement and Possibilities for Reconceptualization
Global education review, 2017
Introduction to Global Education Review: Global Trends in Early Childhood Practice: Working within the Limitations of The Global Education Reform Movement. The Global Education Reform Movement, also known as GERM, is rooted in economic theory and neoliberal thinking. The trends associated with GERM – such as the standardization of teaching and learning, over-emphasis of core subjects of mathematics and literacy, test-based high-stakes accountability and testing, prescribed curriculum, privatization, parental choice, and increased control over students and teachers – have infiltrated the everyday practice of teachers and practitioners in the field and remain a deep cause for concern.
Pedagogika, 70(4), 407–424, 2020
This article analyses the neoliberal transformation of ECEC in five selected countries (Germany, Slovakia, Indonesia, Nepal, and Kenya). Both the Global South and the Global North are represented. The countries were selected either because of the authors' involvement in research in the respective country or because of their long-term personal experience of that particular system of ECEC. The knowledge the authors acquired enabled them to delve deeper into the question of the point at which ECEC systems encounter neoliberal education policy and to describe the different ways in which the countries have adapted to the new policies. The article shows that neoliberal education policies require different types of adaptation and that these may have very different effects on the system of ECEC-from a change in concept to system convergence and practical resistance or total governance of the ECEC sector. The article contributes to a more granular understanding of the effect of the economising discourse on the ECEC sector.
International perspectives on early childhood: a day in the life
Early Years, 2011
Working with early childhood colleagues in other countries can be enlightening and enriching. This paper offers seven insights gained from the international experience: (1) "What It Feels Like To Be a Teacher" discusses observations of student and teacher behavior and attitudes in classrooms in China, a Caribbean island, and India; (2) "Similarities across Countries" notes that teachers' roles may be more powerful determinants of their ideas, ideals, ideologies, concerns, and beliefs than are the larger political, social, and cultural contexts in which they work; (3) "Problems with Comparative Studies" discusses the difficulties inherent in comparing educational provisions and effectiveness across countries; (4) "The Spread of Ideas across Borders" discusses the influence of the British Infant School approach in the 1960s and 1970s, the influence of the innovative province-wide reform work of British Columbia, Canada, in the 1980s, and most recently the influence of the Reggio Emilia approach; (5) "Issues Unique to the United States" explores interests that appear of concern only in the United States, such as the development of self-esteem in children; (6) "Self-Criticism in the United States" discusses one American habit-self-deprecation; and (7) "U.S. Leadership in Anti-Bias and Multicultural Awareness" notes that the United States deserves a great deal of credit for leadership in addressing anti-bias and multicultural issues.