Economic growth and education quality in PISA member countries, 2003–2009

EDUCATION OF PISA MEMBERS vs. ECONOMY

The relationship between economic growth and quality of education of PISA member countries 2003 and 2009

Economic Growth vs. The Quality of Education of Pisa Member Countries

One of the most valuable assets for both the present and future generations is "quality education." Its achievement requires a robust commitment from everyone including teachers, governments, parents, as well as the students themselves. Therefore, this urge motivated a number of countries to form and/or participate in PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) through the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). According to Stephen, Eric and Ludger (2011), the OECD contributes to educational goals via PISA, which monitors the educational results within an approved framework, allowing for legal international comparisons. PISA is an international study assessment of knowledge and skills for 15-year-old students. Additionally, PISA provides information on an assortment of factors, which contribute to the success of students, education systems and schools (Norton & Marvin, 2004). Through showing that various nations succeed in the provision of both equitable and high quality learning outcomes, PISA sets both educational and economic oriented goals for its members, as well as the non-member countries. According toOECD (2010), PISA measures general skills, commonly recognized as basic outcomes from the educational process. Besides testing on facts, its assessments focus the young generation close to the end of compulsory education (Stephen, Eric & Ludger, 2011), and their abilities in utilizing their knowledge and skills in order to encounter the real-life challenges within the world's developing economy.

PISA steadily grew from 32 economies/countries in 2000 to 41 economies in 2003, 58 in 2006, and finally 65 economies/countries by 2009. One of the ultimate aims for educational policy makers is to empower their countries to grab the advantage over the globalized world economy. Consequently, this strategy leads them to emphasize the possible improvements on education policies, thereby ensuring a high quality service provision, equitable distribution of educational opportunities alongside sturdy incentives for great schooling efficiencies (Norton & Marvin, 2004). As a result, a consensus in the literature of PISA reveals that its returns to education were quite substantial. According to Claudia and Larry (2008), a wide array of research on educational returns focused on both micro and macro-economic returns to years of education. The micro-economic literature on income returns to a year of education finds that the returns vary between 6 and 12%. On the other hand, the macro-economic literature reveals its GDP returns to range between 8.5 and 14.5% (Claudia & Larry, 2008).

Results from the 2009 PISA assessment elicited a wide-ranging difference in educational outcomes, both within the member countries and across the non-member countries (OECD, 2010). Education systems which have been capable of securing strong and equitable educational outcomes, as well as mobilizing rapid advancements prove to others that what they would term to be impossible could definitely be possible to achieve (OECD, 2011). Logically, GDP per capita has been having a high impact on educational success; however, this explains only about 7% of the possible disparities in students' average performance (OECD, 2010). The remaining 93% replicates the potentiality of public policies in contributing to such differences (Stephen, Eric & Ludger, 2011). For instance, the striking achievements of Shanghai- China, which leads in every league table of these assessments by a vibrant margin, reveals what could be possible to achieve with the modest economic resources within the diverse social context. Evidently, in mathematics, over a third of the Shanghai's 15-year-old students were capable of conceptualizing, generalizing (OECD, 2010), and creatively using the available information centered on their student-based investigations, as well as modeling multifarious problematic situations. Nonetheless, within the OECD's regional coverage (OECD, 2010), only about 4% of students were capable of reaching that level of performance.

OECD (2011) elicits that while improved educational outcomes may serve as stout predictors of national economic growth, wealth and education expenditures alone does not guarantee superior educational outcomes. Furthermore, PISA proves that an appearance of the world that is profoundly divided into well-educated and rich countries, against poorly educated and underdeveloped countries is no longer applicable. This assertion represents both an opportunity and warning to countries with such mentality. To advanced economies (Claudia & Larry, 2008), it is a warning that they should not take for granted the fact that they may forever own "human capital" that is superior to that found in other countries. However, during times of intensified global competition, they will remain a subject to hard work in order to maintain a leveled base of knowledge and skills that will keep them up during the changing global demands (OECD, 2010). PISA thereby underlines the need for several advanced nations to confront the educational underperformances so that a good number of members in its future workforce may be equipped with at least baseline competencies (OECD, 2010), which enable them to take part in both economic and social developments. Or else, the high socio-economic cost of humble learning performances within the advanced economies will risk becoming an essential drag on economic developments.

On the contrary, PISA also affirms that there should be no reason or room left for despair. Nations from a variety of meager starting points substantially showed their potentials in raising the quality of education outcomes. OECD (2010) reveals that by 2003, Korea's average performance was already high; however, the Korean policy makers were deeply concerned that just a few numbers of elites could achieve the PISA's levels of excellence. Just in less than a decade, Korea was capable of doubling the share of students signifying excellence in literate reading. Similarly, a major renovation in Poland's school systems assisted in drastically reducing the performance inconsistency among its schools thereby reducing the number of poorly performing students while raising the overall performance by the correspondence of over half a school year (Norton & Marvin, 2004).