PISA 2006: School context of science achievement: How ready are our 15-year-olds for tomorrow's world?

School management

In PISA, approaches to school management and decision-making differed markedly across participating countries, from strongly centralised systems to those largely devolved to individual schools. This section examines different facets of school management and decision-making, including the responsibilities and influences of schools and stakeholders, school accountability and autonomy, school choice and parental expectations, grouping policies, teacher vacancies and school resources, with particular reference to New Zealand and other high-performing countries in PISA 2006.

Approaches to school management

In order to determine the levels of responsibility and influence in schools, principals were asked which of principal or teachers, board of trustees or governors, or national education authority they perceived had considerable responsibility for each of a list of tasks covering issues such as staffing, budget matters, disciplinary policies, assessment policies, instructional content, and admission practices. A subsequent question asked which of a series of groups − national education authorities, the school’s board of trustees/governors, parent groups, teacher groups, student groups, or qualification authorities − they thought exerted direct influence on decision-making about staffing, budgeting, instructional content and assessment practices. For both questions, principals were able to choose more than one group if they felt it was appropriate. Answers to these questions are examined in the following sections.

Staffing matters

Under staffing matters, principals were asked who (out of principal or teachers, board of trustees or governors and the national education authorities) had considerable responsibility for the following: selecting teachers for hire, firing teachers, establishing teachers’ starting salaries and determining teachers’ salary increases. Across English-speaking and high-performing countries, the principal or teachers and the board of trustees or governors were frequently reported as having considerable responsibility in the area of appointing and dismissing teachers, but less so in decisions concerning teachers’ salaries.

All 15-year-olds in New Zealand were enrolled in schools where the principal or teachers and the board of trustees or governors had considerable responsibility for appointing teachers, and almost all (97%) for dismissing teachers. For both aspects, the Netherlands and the United States reported similar results (at least 98%). There were also a high percentage of students in the United Kingdom and partner countries Estonia, Hong Kong-China and Chinese Taipei enrolled in schools where the principal or teachers and the board of trustees or governors had considerable responsibility for appointing and dismissing teachers (ranging from 72% to 97%); the OECD average was 59 percent and 50 percent for these two aspects, respectively. In comparison to New Zealand, there was a lower proportion of students enrolled in such schools in Australia, Canada, Finland, Japan and Korea (ranging from 14% to 58%).

For the majority of countries who participated in PISA 2006, principals most frequently reported that national education authorities had considerable responsibility for establishing teachers’ starting salaries and determining salary increases, leaving little discretion for school bodies. In New Zealand, 13 percent of 15-year-olds were enrolled in schools where the principal reported that the principal or teachers and the board of trustees or governors had considerable responsibility for establishing teachers’ starting salaries, similar to Australia (13%), Canada (11%), Korea (13%), and partner country Estonia (11%). A higher proportion of students were enrolled in such schools in the Netherlands (75%), the United Kingdom (55%), and the United States (80%), while Finland and Ireland reported a lower proportion (5% and 4% respectively) in comparison to New Zealand; the OECD average was 22 percent.

New Zealand had 23 percent of students enrolled in schools where the principal or teachers and the board of trustees or governors had considerable responsibility for determining salary increases for teachers – similar to the OECD average (21%). In comparison to New Zealand, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States had a higher percentage of students enrolled in such schools (ranging from 61% to 78%). Among the English-speaking or high-performing countries, Finland, Ireland and Korea reported the lowest proportion of students (ranging from 3% to 6%) enrolled in such schools.

Table 3: Proportion of students in schools where principal, teachers and school board reportedly had considerable responsibility for staffing matters

Area of staffing	Percentage of students
	New Zealand	OECD average
Selecting teachers for hire	100	59
Dismissing teachers	97	50
Establishing teachers’ starting salaries	13	22
Determining teachers’ salary increases	23	21

Of the six categories of bodies listed in Table 4, in general regional or national education authorities and the school’s governing board were most frequently reported as exerting a direct influence on decisions related to staffing in English-speaking and high-performing countries. Approximately three-quarters of 15-year-olds in New Zealand were enrolled in schools where national education authorities or the school’s governing board exerted a direct influence on decision-making about staffing. The OECD averages were 54 percent and 34 percent respectively for these two stakeholders, as shown in Table 4.

The influence teacher groups had in this area was also quite prominent: 46 percent of 15-years-olds in New Zealand were enrolled in schools where teacher groups exerted a direct influence on decisions about staffing, which is similar to Australia (43%), Canada (37%), Finland (37%) and the United States (37%). Of the countries that New Zealand is compared with, Australia, Finland, Korea, the Netherlands and partner country Estonia reported teacher groups as the second most frequently reported stakeholder to exert a direct influence on staffing decisions. The other three stakeholders – parent groups, student groups and external examination boards − had minor input in comparison across English-speaking or high-performing countries.

Table 4: Proportion of students in schools where stakeholders reportedly exerted a direct influence on decisions related to staffing

Stakeholders influencing staffing	Percentage of students
	New Zealand	OECD average
Regional or national education authorities	73	54
The school’s governing board	75	34
Parent groups	1	4
Teacher groups	46	29
Student groups	3	7
External examination board	3	7

Budget matters

Principals were asked who has considerable responsibility for decisions about budget allocations within the school. The majority of students in English-speaking and high-performing countries were enrolled in schools where the principal or teachers and the board of trustees or governors had considerable responsibility for decisions in this area of school policy and management (ranging from 79% to 99%). New Zealand had the highest proportion of 15-year-olds enrolled at such schools (99%), and was similar to Ireland (95%), the Netherlands (99%), the United Kingdom (97%) and the United States (95%); the OECD average was also high (84%).

Of the six categories of bodies listed in Table 5, the school’s governing board was most frequently reported as exerting a direct influence on budgeting decisions in New Zealand and across the OCED countries in general. In New Zealand, 95 percent of 15-year-olds were enrolled in such schools; this was similar to the United Kingdom (91%), the United States (94%) and partner country Hong Kong-China (92%), but significantly higher than the OECD average (62%).

The regional or national education authorities were the second most frequently reported stakeholder to exert a direct influence on budgeting decisions among the English-speaking and high-performing countries. Fifty-nine percent of 15-year-olds in New Zealand were enrolled in such schools, which is similar to most other English-speaking and high-performing countries with the exception of Ireland (73%), the United States (77%) and Chinese Taipei (75%).

Table 5: Proportion of students in schools where stakeholders reportedly exerted a direct influence on decisions related to budgeting

Stakeholders in budget	Percentage of students
	New Zealand	OECD average
Regional or national education authorities	59	50
The school’s governing board	95	62
Parent groups	3	14
Teacher groups	24	24
Student groups	4	6
External examination board	5	10

Instructional matters

Principals were asked who has considerable responsibility for the following: choosing which textbooks are used, determining course content, and deciding which courses are offered. In general, schools in the English-speaking and high-performing countries had a lot more discretion in choosing textbooks and what courses to offer, but less so in the area of course content.

All 15-year-olds in New Zealand were enrolled in schools where the principal reported that the principal or teachers and the board of trustees or governors had considerable responsibility for deciding which textbooks to use. With the exception of Canada, which reported only 39 percent of students enrolled in such schools, all other English-speaking and high-performing countries reported a high proportion of students (ranging from 72% to 100%) enrolled in schools where the principal or teachers and the board of trustees or governors had considerable responsibility for this aspect of school policy and management; the OECD average was 80 percent.

The majority of 15-year-olds in New Zealand (90%) were also in schools where the principal or teachers and the board of trustees or governors had considerable responsibility for deciding what courses to offer. This was similar to Japan (93%), the United Kingdom (87%) and partner countries Hong Kong-China (93%) and Estonia (85%), but significantly higher than that for Canada (44%) and the OECD average (51%). All remaining English-speaking and high-performing countries reported a majority of students in such schools (ranging from 64% to 82%).

Compared with the two instructional aspects discussed above, a lower proportion of 15-year-olds in New Zealand (69%) were enrolled in schools where the principal or teachers and the board of trustees or governors had considerable responsibility for determining course content. This is similar to the United Kingdom (74%), Estonia (65%) and partner country Chinese Taipei (76%); significantly higher than that for Australia (31%), Canada (12%), Finland (38%), Ireland (35%), and the OECD average (43%); and lower than that for Japan (93%), Korea (93%) and partner country Hong Kong-China (87%). Canada reported the lowest proportion of students under each aspect (out of the English-speaking and high-performing countries); it appears such decisions are made in tandem with the Canadian government.

Table 6: Proportion of students in schools where principal, teachers and school board reportedly had considerable responsibility for instructional matters

Area of instructional content	Percentage of students
	New Zealand	OECD average
Choosing which textbooks are used	100	80
Deciding which courses are offered	90	51
Determining course content	69	43

Principals were asked who (out of the six stakeholders listed in Table 7) exerts a direct influence on decisions related to instructional content. Among the English-speaking or high-performing countries, three stakeholders – the regional or national education authorities, the school’s governing board, and the external examination board − were most frequently reported as exerting a direct influence on decision-making about instructional content. New Zealand, along with Australia, Canada, Finland, Ireland, the United States and partner country Chinese Taipei, most frequently reported that regional or national authorities exerted a direct influence on decisions related to instructional content, while Japan, Korea, the Netherlands and partner country Estonia most frequently reported teacher groups as exerting a direct influence. In contrast, the United Kingdom and partner country Hong Kong-China most frequently reported external examination boards as exerting a direct influence in this area. The other three stakeholders − the school’s governing board, parent groups and students groups − generally had less input in comparison.

Table 7: Proportion of students in schools where stakeholders reportedly exerted direct influence on decisions related to instructional content

Stakeholders in instructional content	Percentage of students
	New Zealand	OECD average
Regional or national education authorities	77	66
The school’s governing board	11	22
Parent groups	12	14
Teacher groups	59	56
Student groups	12	19
External examination board	45	22

Assessment practices

Principals were asked who has considerable responsibility for establishing student assessment policies. This could have been interpreted as either internal to the school or overall assessment policies. With the exception of Canada (25%), all other English-speaking or high-performing countries reported a majority of 15-year-olds (ranging from 50% to 99%) enrolled in schools where the principal or teachers and the board of trustees or governors had considerable responsibility for setting student assessment policies. Eighty-two percent of students in New Zealand were enrolled in such schools, similar to Finland (79%) and the United Kingdom (86%), but higher than the OECD average (63%).

Of the six stakeholders (listed below in Table 8), regional or national education authorities, teacher groups and the external examinations board were most frequently cited as exerting a direct influence on decisions related to assesment practices in English-speaking or high-performing countries. Ninety-six percent of 15-year-olds in New Zealand were enrolled in schools where the external examinations board exerted a direct influence on decisions related to assessment practices, the highest proportion reported among countries for the above criteria, similar to Hong Kong-China (93%) but significantly higher than the OECD average (40%). Finland, Japan and Chinese Taipei reported much lower proportions of students in such schools (23%, 7%, and 27% respectively).

Table 8: Proportion of students in schools where stakeholders reportedly exerted a direct influence on decision-making about assessment practices

Stakeholders in assessment practices	Percentage of students
	New Zealand	OECD average
Regional or national education authorities	79	59
The school’s governing board	11	29
Parent groups	5	16
Teacher groups	59	59
Student groups	5	21
External examination board	96	40

Admission policies

Eighty-seven percent of 15-year-olds in New Zealand were enrolled in schools where the principal(s) or teachers had considerable responsibility for approving student admission to the school. This is similar to Korea (83%), the United States (88%) and partner country Hong Kong-China (91%), and higher than the OECD average (74%). Compared with New Zealand, there were proportionally more students enrolled in such schools in Japan (99%) and the Netherlands (97%), while Chinese Taipei had proportionally fewer (33%).

Disciplinary policies

With the exception of Canada, a majority of students in the English-speaking or high-performing countries were enrolled in schools where the principal reported that the principal or teachers and the board of trustees or governors had considerable responsibility for establishing student disciplinary policies. Ninety-six percent of 15-year-olds in New Zealand were enrolled in such schools. This is similar to Japan, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, the United States, and partner countries Estonia and Hong Kong-China (ranging from 90% to 100%).

School accountability

Principals were asked a number of questions relating to their use of achievement data, feedback provided to the parents and the public, and their perceptions of pressure from parents to achieve high academic standards. These questions were designed to explore aspects of the school’s accountability to parents and the wider public. For New Zealand schools, the Education Review Office has the main responsibility for evaluating the quality of education provided within each school, and reports are freely available to the public.

Uses made of achievement data

Principals were asked how frequently achievement data were used for accountability purposes in each of the following five areas: posted publicly, used in evaluation of the principals’ performance, used in evaluation of teachers’ performance, used to decide instructional allocation to the school, and tracked over time by an administrative authority. Achievement data were defined in the question as including “aggregated school or Year/Form-level assessment results or school-leaver qualifications”. Thus, this question covers a number of different types of achievement data, but with a focus on their use for accountability purposes.

Not surprisingly, tracking by an administrative authority was most commonly identified among New Zealand principals as a way for achievement data to be used for accountability purposes (nearly all students were in such schools). The majority of students (two-thirds) were in schools where principals indicated achievement data were posted publicly for accountability purposes. It was less common for principals to indicate that achievement data were used in the evaluation of principals’ or teachers’ performance among New Zealand schools (38% and 47% respectively).

Although achievement data were more commonly perceived to be used for accountability purposes in New Zealand than in many of our OECD counterparts (with averages ranging from 30% to 65% – see Appendix 2 for details), the United Kingdom put much greater emphasis on this and Finland much less emphasis than New Zealand. Nearly all students in the United Kingdom were in schools where the principal reported achievement data were used to evaluate the principals’ and teachers’ performance, as well as posted publicly and tracked by an administrative authority (ranging from 92% to 94%). In contrast, few students in Finland were in schools where principals indicated achievement data were posted publicly or used in the evaluation of principals’ and teachers’ performance (ranging from 3% to 14%).

Principals were also asked about the type of information that was given to parents about their child’s performance. Fifty percent of students in New Zealand were enrolled in schools where parents were provided with information on student performance relative to other students in the same school. This is similar to the United Kingdom (55%) and the OECD average (54%). There were a lot more students enrolled in schools who employed this method in Canada (79%), Korea (84%), and Hong Kong-China (86%) compared to New Zealand. Schools in Finland were less likely to provide information to parents in this way, with only 15 percent of students enrolled in such schools.

It was less likely for New Zealand schools to provide information on student performance relative to other students in other schools to parents, with only 37 percent of students enrolled in such schools; the OECD average was 27 percent. New Zealand in this respect was similar to Canada (34%), Korea (42%) and the United Kingdom (36%), while the United States had significantly more students (64%). On the other end of the scale, Finland, the Netherlands and partner country Hong Kong-China had much fewer, with 6 to 16 percent of students enrolled at such schools.

School choice

In order to gauge the options available to parents when choosing a school for their child, school principals were asked how many other schools were available to students in your location. The majority of parents in New Zealand had a choice in deciding what school to send their child to, with 82 percent of students enrolled in schools located in areas where there were two or more schools available. In this respect, New Zealand was similar to Australia (88%), Japan (82%), the United Kingdom (84%), and partner countries Hong Kong-China (90%) and Chinese Taipei (81%). Only 7 percent of New Zealand students were enrolled in schools where there was only one other school in the area. This is lower than the OECD average (14%), but similar to Australia (5%), Japan (8%), Korea (9%), the United Kingdom (9%), the United States (11%) and partner country Hong Kong-China (9%). Only 11 percent of New Zealand students were enrolled in schools where principals reported that there was no other available school in their area. This was less than half that for the OECD average (26%), but similar to Australia (6%), Japan (10%), the Netherlands (11%) and partner country Chinese Taipei (6%). In comparison to New Zealand, Finland had substantially more students enrolled in such schools (44%).

Table 9: Proportion of students in schools with two, one or no other schools in the same area

Number of schools competing for students in the same area	Proportion of students (%)
	New Zealand	OECD average
Two or more other schools	82	60
One other school	7	14
No other schools	11	26

Parental expectations for high academic standards

In order to gauge parental expectations of the school for academic standards, principals were asked to indicate whether they perceived there to be constant pressure from many parents, who expect our schools to set very high academic standards and to have our students achieve them; whether this pressure to achieve higher academic standards among students comes from only a minority of parents; or whether pressure from parents on the school to achieve higher academic standards among students is largely absent.

Forty-four percent of students in New Zealand were enrolled in schools where principals perceived there was a constant pressure from many parents to set very high academic standards and have their students achieve them; 49 percent of students were enrolled in schools where pressure for higher academic standards only came from a minority of parents; and 7 percent of students were enrolled in schools where the pressure to achieve higher academic standards was largely absent. Relative to students in other OECD countries in general, more New Zealand students were in schools where principals perceived they received constant pressure from many parents to achieve high academic standards (see Table 10). The New Zealand proportion of students was similar to Australia (37%), Ireland (43%), Japan (39%), the United Kingdom (38%), and the United States (36%), but markedly higher than Finland (1%), Luxemburg (2%) and Hong Kong-China (3%).

Seven percent of students in New Zealand were enrolled in schools where pressure to achieve higher academic standards was largely absent. This was significantly lower than the OECD average of 32 percent, but similar to Australia (10%), and partner country Chinese Taipei (6%).

Table 10: Proportion of students in schools, by parental expectations for high academic standards

Parental expectations to achieve high academic standards among students	Proportion of students (%)
	New Zealand	OECD average
Constant pressure from many parents	44	21
Pressure from a minority of parents	49	47
Pressure from parents largely absent	7	32

Grouping policies

In order to examine the ways in which countries address diversity among their students, PISA examined two policies on pre-selection to school (entitled admittance policies) and ability grouping within schools. These are discussed in the following sections.

School admittance policies

School principals were asked to indicate to what extent the following are considered when admitting students to their school: residence in a particular area; student’s academic record; recommendations of feeder schools; parents’ endorsement of the school’s instructional or religious philosophy; student’s need or desire for a special programme; and attendance of other family members at the school.

New Zealand, along with Canada (78%), Finland (75%), the United Kingdom (61%) and the United States (81%), most frequently reported that residence in a particular area was at least a high priority. Japan (86%), Korea (59%) and partner countries Estonia (44%), Hong Kong-China (83%) and Chinese Taipei (53%) most frequently reported that a student’s academic record was at least a high priority. In contrast, both residence in a particular area and attendance of other family members were the highest considerations in Australia (42% for both). The Netherlands rated recommendations of feeder schools as most important, with over 90 percent of 15-year-olds enrolled in schools where this was at least a high priority.

As shown in Table 11, 49 percent of 15-year-olds in New Zealand were enrolled in schools where the principal reported that residence in a particular area was a prerequisite or high priority. This was similar to Australia (42%) and the OECD average (47%). The proportion for the United Kingdom (61%), Canada (78%), Finland (75%) and the United States (81%) was significantly higher than New Zealand in comparison.

Table 11: Proportion of students in schools, by school admittance policies

Statements reported by the principal as a ‘prerequisite’ or a ‘high priority’ for admittance at their school	Proportion of students (%)
	New Zealand	OECD average
Residence in a particular area	49	47
Student’s academic records	9	27
Recommendation of feeder schools	16	13
Parents’ endorsement of the instructional or religious philosophy of the school	19	12
Student’s need or desire for a special programme	19	19
Attendance of other family members	31	17

A student’s academic record was the least prominent factor in New Zealand: only 9 percent of students were enrolled in schools where the principal reported this as a prerequisite or high priority. This is similar to Australia (9%), Canada (10%), Finland (4%), the United Kingdom (10%) and the United States (8%). In contrast, the relevance of a student’s academic record was more prominent in Japan (86%), Korea (59%), the Netherlands (65%), Estonia (44%), Hong Kong-China (83%) and Chinese Taipei (53%). The OECD average was 27 percent. With the exception of Estonia, countries that reported a higher proportion of their students enrolled in schools where the academic record was a prerequisite or high priority generally registered residency less of a priority, and vice versa.

Attendance of other family members at the school was the second-highest admission policy for New Zealand schools, with 31 percent of 15-years-olds enrolled in schools where principals reported this as a prerequisite or high priority. Both Canada (26%) and the United Kingdom (33%) were similar to New Zealand. Australia was significantly higher in this respect at 42 percent. In comparison to New Zealand, all other countries (presented in Figure 4) considered this less of a priority. The OECD average for this aspect was also substantially less at 17 percent. Fewer than 1 percent of students were enrolled in such schools in Korea.

While the recommendation of feeder schools was the leading admission criterion for the Netherlands, in New Zealand it was less common with only 16 percent of students enrolled in schools where principals reported this as a prerequisite or high priority. This is similar to most other countries (presented in Figure 4), including Australia (18%), Canada (22%) and the United States (9%). Only Finland (2%) and the United Kingdom (7%) were significantly lower. Nineteen percent of students in New Zealand were enrolled in schools where the parents’ support of the instructional or religious philosophy of the school. Similarly 19 percent were enrolled in schools where the student’s need or desire for a special programme was a prerequisite or high priority. The OECD average for these two aspects was 12 percent and 19 percent respectively.

Figure 4: Proportion of students in schools, by factors reported by principals as being a ‘prerequisite’ or a ‘high priority’ for admittance at their school

Notes:

Graphs present information for English-speaking and high-performing countries. An asterisk ( *) denotes non-OECD countries. The OECD average includes all OECD countries, not just those presented in these graphs.

Ability groupings

Principals were asked to indicate the extent to which ability groupings were used within their school, either grouping by ability into different classes (streaming, broad-banding, or setting) or grouping by ability within classes. Note that where ability grouping is used, any grouping is still likely to include a range of abilities and differences will still be evident. The majority of schools in English-speaking or high-performing countries grouped their students according to ability in one form or another.

Most commonly across countries, ability grouping was used only for some subjects. Ninety-one percent of students in New Zealand were enrolled in schools where grouping took place for some subjects. New Zealand had one of the highest proportions among the English-speaking and high-performing countries, and was similar to Australia (90%), Korea (82%) and the United Kingdom (92%), but significantly higher than the OECD average (54%).

With the exception of the Netherlands, which had 48 percent of students enrolled in schools where there was ability grouping in all subjects, this frequency of grouping was less common among the English-speaking and high-performing countries. In New Zealand, only 6 percent of students were enrolled in schools where ability grouping was applied across all subjects. This is similar to Australia (5%), Korea (7%), the United Kingdom (8%) and the United States (7%); the OECD average was higher at 14 percent.

It was relatively uncommon for New Zealand schools to use no form of grouping, with only 3 percent of students in New Zealand enrolled in such schools. This was similar to Australia (6%) and the United Kingdom (less than 1%). Over 40 percent of students in Finland, Japan, and partner countries Chinese Taipei and Estonia were enrolled in schools where there was no ability grouping in place. Similarly, across the OECD countries, one-third of students were in schools where there was no ability grouping in place.

Principals were not asked specifically whether grouping was used to form science classes or used within science classes in their schools. However, comparisons were made between scientific literacy achievement in PISA and general grouping policies in schools. There was no significant difference in scientific literacy achievement between students in schools where different grouping policies were in place.

Table 12: Proportion of students in schools, by ability grouping policy in schools (between and/or within classes)

Grouping policy	Proportion of students (%)
	New Zealand	OECD average
No ability grouping	3	33
Ability grouping for some subjects	91	54
Ability grouping for all subjects	6	14

 

Note:

Proportions should add up to 100%; inconsistencies are due to rounding.

Resources invested in education

Teacher shortages

Principals were asked to report whether all vacant science teaching positions were filled in the previous year in their school. Nearly all schools either had no vacant science teaching positions (19% of students in such schools) or managed to fill all vacancies for science teachers (79% of students were in such schools). Only two percent of students were in schools that failed to fill all vacant science teaching positions.

New Zealand students were more likely to be in schools where vacancies in science teaching occurred than students in other OECD countries (81% in New Zealand compared with 62% across OECD countries), but in New Zealand these vacancies were more likely to be filled. The net result was a similarly low level of students in schools with vacant science teaching positions: 2 percent in New Zealand and 3 percent on average across the OECD.

In schools where all science teaching positions were filled, New Zealand principals were less likely to report that a lack of qualified science teachers hindered instruction at least to some extent than in schools where there were science teaching vacancies. However, 15 percent of students were in schools where, despite no vacancies, lack of qualified science teachers was seen to hinder instruction. This finding implies that vacancies were filled by teachers whose qualifications were not to the level desired for the position.

In order to examine the perceived impact of teacher shortages on instruction, an index of teacher shortage was created by combining responses to questions about the extent to which the shortage or inadequacy of teachers in science, languages, mathematics and other subjects hindered the school’s capacity to provide instruction. Higher values on the index indicate a greater perceived impact of teacher shortages on the capacity of schools to provide instruction.

New Zealand students were in schools with relatively high levels of perceived impact on instruction by teacher shortages as measured by the index of teacher shortage compared to the average across the OECD, but were similar to Australia.

In those New Zealand schools where the impact of teacher shortages was perceived to be greater, students’ achievement reflected this perception and was significantly lower than in schools where teacher shortages were not perceived to be a problem (see Figure 5). This pattern was observed both in New Zealand and generally across OECD countries.

Figure 5: Mean science achievement of New Zealand students at each quarter of the index of teacher shortage

 

Notes:

Standard errors are presented in parentheses. Points indicate best estimates of the achievement of 15-year-old students in the population, while lines extending from the points indicate the 95% confidence interval – the region in which the population mean is most likely to lie.

Higher values on the index indicate greater perceived impact of teacher shortages on the capacity of schools to provide instruction.

Educational resources

Along with the questions on the impact of the lack of qualified teachers on the school’s capacity to provide instruction, principals were also asked about the impact of shortages or inadequacies of a list of seven resources (shown in Table 13). On average, compared to other OECD countries, New Zealand students were less likely to be in schools where principals were concerned that an inadequacy or shortage of resources hindered science instruction (differences in proportions between New Zealand and the OECD average ranged from 5% to 24%). The exception was shortage or inadequacy of computers for instruction, where a higher proportion of New Zealand students (42%) were in schools where principals perceived this lack to adversely affect the school’s capacity to provide instruction compared with their OECD counterparts (average 37%).

The overall pattern of generally less perceived impact on instruction in New Zealand compared with other countries is consistent with results from other international studies, namely PIRLS (Caygill & Chamberlain, 2004) and TIMSS (Chamberlain & Caygill, 2002). For the laboratory equipment, instructional materials, computer software, and library resources, similar proportions of students in Australia were in schools where principals perceived the lack of these resources hindered instruction (see Table 13). Internet connectivity was far less of a perceived problem in New Zealand than in Australia, while audio-visual resources and lack of computers were much more of a problem in New Zealand compared with Australia.

Table 13: Proportions of students in schools, by extent to which a lack of resources was perceived to hinder a school’s capacity to provide instruction

Is your school’s capacity to provide instruction hindered by any of the following?	Percentage of students where principals responded a lot or to some extent
	New Zealand	Australia	OECD average
Shortage or inadequacy of science laboratory equipment	18	23	42
Shortage or inadequacy of instructional materials (e.g. textbooks)	16	14	25
Shortage or inadequacy of computers for instruction	42	34	37
Lack or inadequacy of Internet connectivity	0	17	20
Shortage or inadequacy of computer software for instruction	25	26	38
Shortage or inadequacy of library materials	12	16	34
Shortage or inadequacy of audio-visual resources	26	17	37

Notes:

Adjusted percentages are shown. The percentage of students with missing responses for each of these items was about 5 to 6%; these students are not included in this table.

In order to examine the perceived impact of resource shortages or inadequacies on instruction, an index of school principals’ perceptions of the quality of the schools’ educational resources was created by combining responses to questions about the extent to which shortage or inadequacy of resources hindered the school’s capacity to provide instruction. Higher values on the index indicate less perceived impact of resource shortages on the capacity of schools to provide instruction.

New Zealand students were in schools with relatively low perceived impact on instruction by resource shortages, summarised by the index, compared to the average across the OECD, but similar to Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

In New Zealand schools where the impact of resource shortages or inadequacies was perceived to be greater, students’ achievement reflected this perception and was significantly lower than in schools where resource shortages or inadequacies were not perceived to be a problem (see Figure 6). This pattern was also observed across OECD countries.

Figure 6: Mean science achievement of New Zealand students at each quarter of the index of quality of schools’ educational resources

Notes:

Standard errors are given in parentheses. Points indicate best estimates of the achievement of 15-year-old students in the population, while lines extending from the points indicate the 95% confidence interval – the region in which the population mean is most likely to lie.

Higher values on the index indicate less perceived impact of educational resource shortages or inadequacies on the capacity of schools to provide instruction.