Centre For Educational Research And Innovation Research Articles

Innovative Learning Environments: About Traditional and New Patterns of Learning

How can the conception of formal learning environments like schools foster individual learning and the acquisition of the competences necessary for a rewarding participation in the knowledge societies of the twenty-first century? Just how important learning has become as an issue for society is demonstrated by the interest shown in the subject by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). A project launched by its Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) in a number of countries (including several European countries, among them Austria) focuses on how ‘innovative learning environments' (ILE) can contribute to offering meaningful and sustainable learning experiences for learners in the twenty-first century. This article presents the main findings of the Austrian part of the project and discusses whether and how the development of ILE is possible against the background of school routines and a school system that –despite a number of reform projects — seems to be successfully resistant to change. The article focuses on the question of whether and how learning is made meaningful for the pupils and whether and how those learning environments identified as innovative really do support fruitful and meaningful processes of learning.

Evidence and Policy Research

The EERJ roundtable took as its point of departure the experience of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD) Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) in carrying out policy research. CERI has conducted four reviews of national educational research and development (in New Zealand, England, Mexico and Denmark), and has run a number of meetings specifically on the use of evidence-based policy research (in the USA, Sweden and the Netherlands). Tom Schuller, Head of CERI, presented some conclusions from these and other CERI activities. Responses were made by Wim Jochems, Open University of the Netherlands, Lejf Moos, Danish University of Education, and Agnes van Zanten, Observatoire Sociologique du Changement, CNRS, Paris. The EERJ Roundtable was an opportunity to return to the issues raised in the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER) 2003 Hamburg Roundtable on the ‘OECD Examiners' Report on Educational Research and Development in England’ ( European Educational Research Journal, 3(2), 2004, pp. 510–526) in a wider context and as part of a trend to evaluate the quality and organisation of educational research, and its contribution to educational policy.

Constructing International Policy Research: The Role of CERI/OECD

This article discusses how the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) addresses the task of conducting international policy research. The article begins with a descriptive account of CERI's work, including the way member countries shape the research agenda. Several issues which relate to how research evidence is compiled within an international context are addressed. First, why the supposed priority area of lifelong learning is only weakly supported by systematic research is considered. The author raises the question of how we are to judge the quality and impact of international research work, especially where it is policy-related. He suggests that an increasing focus on the outcomes of education raises questions about causality in a policy research context. This leads to some brief consideration of evaluation of research, and of the country as a unit of methodological analysis. Finally, he asks what might be meant by learning from international experience.

Quality teachers, quality schools: International perspectives and policy implications

Teachers are at the heart of educational improvement. Any benefits that accrue to students as a result of educational policies require the enabling action of teachers. It is for this reason that the OECD, through its Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI), recently undertook a comparative study of policies aimed at improving teacher quality. This paper presents the main findings of the country studies conducted in 1993. Following a description of the conceptual framework of the OECD study, the two central sections of the paper contain an analysis first, of the attributes and activities of these highly accomplished teachers, and second of the key characteristics of the schools in which they work. The key characteristics of high quality teachers highlighted by the study are: commitment, love of children, mastery of subject didactics and multiple models of teaching, the ability to collaborate with other teachers, and a capacity for reflection. The school level characteristics supportive of high quality teachers identified in the case studies are: a consensus on vision and values, an organisation for teaching and learning, coherent management arrangements, formal and informal leadership, staff development focused on the workplace, and effective relationships with the community and local district. The evidence of the case studies suggests that there are three sources of teacher quality—the individual teacher, the individual school, and the external policy environment. In the final section of the paper these three alternative sources of teacher quality are described, as well as the policy implications flowing from them.

Labour Markets of the Future: The Challenge to Education Policy Makers

In addressing the complex issues of the relationship between new technologies and human resources, different methodological approaches can be applied. A rich source of studies exists at the micro level, i.e. enterprises and/or sectors which focus, in particular, on the qualitative changes taking place. Fewer studies exist on the macro level for this subject, given its complexity and lack of adequate data. This article addresses the issues from both perspectives, but findings from the micro perspective predominate. It is structured around developments and changes on the demand and supply side and their interaction. The final section identifies some principal policy issues for governments as they relate both to demand and supply measures, as well as the need to strengthen the database for a better understanding of the issues involved. It draws heavily on recent and ongoing work on the subject carried out within the Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The importance of the 'human capital' component of national wealth has been recognised and analysed by many economists during the post-war period. During the 1980s there was also growing government interest in human resources development. Many national governments have started to address the issue of whether existing systems of education and training are adequately equipped to meet increasing international competition and the particular challenges posed by new technologies. To this has been added the fear in many quarters that new technologies might increase unemployment. Such fears have been sustained by an apparent paradox when looking at the economy in many OECD countries in more general terms, namely that many countries have seen economic growth over a long period along with very high unemployment. One school of thought has tried to explain this paradox in terms of an emerging 'jobless growth society' where the economy is growing without being able to create full employment as traditionally defined. Another approach to explaining the paradox has focused on seeing it as a temporary phenomenon that increased deregulation and free market forces would be able to solve over time.

The post-school experiences of young people with a disability

The transition of young people with disabilities from school to work and adult living has been the focus of attention for the Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) of OECD for some years. Various member countries of OECD have implemented transition education programmes as a result of community-based educational policies for students with disabilities. To establish a baseline of the post-school experiences of disabled students a follow-up study of a sample of ex-students in New South Wales, Australia, was conducted. While the responses to the survey came essentially from students who had been in special schools and hence may be unrepresentative of the total population of disabled ex-students, the data indicate some interesting trends. Only 42% were in open employment. Those with a moderate or severe intellectual disability were generally in sheltered workshops, activity centres or at home. The majority of respondents indicated that work was an important part of their lives, not so much from an economic perspective, but especially as it afforded them a social outlet. The implications of the findings are discussed in the context of the current emphasis upon community-based rather than sheltered employment for people with disabilities.

The CERI INSET project: a description and a preliminary evaluation of international co‐development work

Between 1975 and 1980 the Organization for European Co‐operation and Development's (OECD) Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) engaged in a major project to enable its member countries to share experience of innovatory approaches to the in‐service education of teachers. This paper refers briefly to one strand of the project ‐ the collection and synthesis of case‐study material ‐ and describes in more detail the second strand: the co‐development work on the themes of teacher participation, evaluation, training the trainers, and the development of training materials. A preliminary evaluation is offered of the benefits gained in terms of accessing the international network, the motivation of participants, the development of in‐service education for teachers (INSET) research, and influences on national policy.

Universities and the needs of local and regional communities comments on the outlook of the centre for educational research and innovation of the organisation for economic co-operation and development

In February 1980, the Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) of the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) sponsored an international conference in Paris on the subject Higher Education and The Community: New Partnerships and Interaction. The published results of that conference, as issued by the CERI Secretariat, are disturbing in their implications for universities as centres of advanced teaching and research, for the academic freedom of individual scholars and for the autonomy of institutions of higher education. The task of the Centre, as stated by its own publications, is to study the relationship of educational systems to societies at large with particular emphasis on the role of education in the development of economic and political systems.1 CERI describes educational institutions as serving two functions. The first is the provision of society with various specified benefits, such as technically trained managers, scientists and the knowledge produced by scientific research. The second is the provision of individuals with skill sufficient to enable them to fill a useful and rewarding occupation. These are laudable goals and useful functions. But the Centre assesses the value of educational institutions exclusively in accordance with the criteria represented by these objectives. It concentrates on utility in the short term and minimises other values, such as liberal education, free inquiry and autonomy which may be of more enduring significance. The dangers for academic freedom in higher education which the Centre's outlook would create became apparent during the course of the Conference in 1980 and in the Summary and Conclusions published after the Conference.2 Since its inception in 1968, the Centre for Educational Research and Innovation has undertaken several comprehensive studies on various issues within higher education as part of its effort to define the proper goals of education.3 Several years ago it began to deal with the relations between universities and their