NFS möde 2010 Reykjavík, Grand Hotel April 8 th 2010 The question of drop-outs What are the issues ― and for whom? Jón Torfi Jónasson School of Education, University of Iceland

What are the issues? The drop-out issue Some personal remarks Do I need to know? On the interaction between educational research and the pragmatics of everyday schooling How does research affect the practice of education? My present position: Researcher-Administrator Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

What are the issues? The drop-out issue The study of drop-out, a long time interest Three projects – A study of the efficiency of upper secondary schools – A Nordic drop-out study – An international drop-out study A return to the basic issues Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Project: Efficiency of upper secondary schools The definition of an efficient school? The dearth of evidence on the long-term added value of individual schools The evidence we have suggests the debate or discourse shies away from data, but is nourished by hearsay Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Project: Nordic project on droput Markussen, Eifred (2010), Frafall i utdanning for åringer i Norden. Nordisk Ministerråd: København. Udgivet i April 2010 Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Project: Nordic project on droput 1.Frafald i de danske ungdomsuddannelser Christian Helms Jørgensen, Roskilde Universitet Frafall og videregående opplæring i Finland: en gjennomgang av nyere studier og tiltak for å holde flere i utdanning Risto Rinne & Tero Järvinen, Universitetet i Turku Frafall i skolen og tiltak mot frafall på Island: Ulike perspektiver Kristjana Stella Blöndal og Jón Torfi Jónasson, Háskóli Íslands89 4. Frafall i videregående opplæring i Norge: Forskning, omfang, hva kan gjøres og hva virker? Eifred Markussen, Norsk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning Avhopp från svensk gymnasieskola Lars Petterson, Lunds Universitet.149 Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Project: Nordic project on droput 6. Frafall i utdanning for 16–20-åringer i Norden Eifred Markussen, Norsk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning Frafall – hva mener vi med det? Videregående opplærings struktur i de fem landene Forskning om frafall Hva viser forskningen – hvor mange faller fra? Hva viser forskningen – hvorfor avbryter noen ungdommer videregående opplæring? Politikk og tiltak for å redusere frafall og bedre gjennomføring og kompetanseoppnåelse Er det mulig å eliminere frafallet? Tiltak på tre nivåer Forskningsbehov Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Project: IRYNET Lamb, S., Markussen, E., Teese, R., Sandberg, N., & Polesel, J. (eds) (2010) School dropout and completion: international comparative studies in theory and policy, Springer: Dordrecht. Published Autumn 2010 Island, Norge, Finland, Scotland, England, Tyskland, Polen, Sveits, Frankrike, Spania, USA, Canada og Australia Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The Norwegian slides ara adapted from Eifred Markussen Norsk institutt for studier av innovasjon, forskning og utdanning NIFU-STEP København 24.mars 2010

Frafall – hva mener vi med det? Island: Andelen av en fødselskohort som ved 24 års alder ikke er i utdanning eller ikke har bestått videregående opplæring. Norge: De som fem år etter at de gikk ut av grunnskolen (eller begynte i videregående) har gått mindre enn tre år i videregående og som på dette tidspunktet ikke er i videregående. Danmark: a) Alle som avbryter en utdanning som de er startet på, også om de begynner på en annen utdanning. b) De som ikke har fullført og bestått en videregående opplæring målt 25 år etter at de har forlatt grunnskolen (profilmodellen). Sverige: De som ikke har oppnådd ”slutbetyg”, dvs. at de har forlatt videregående opplæring (gymnasieskolan) før de var ferdige Finland: Definerer ikke frafall. Fokus på de som verken er i utdanning eller jobb – NEET (Not in Education, Employment and Training). Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Behov for samordning av definisjonene? Ikke nødvendigvis, så lenge man vet hva man snakker om Uten samordning: Vil fortsette å sammenligne ulike størrelser Anbefaling: Skille de som slutter fra de som gjennomfører uten bestått Anbefaling: – Nordisk forskningsprosjekt omkring frafall i videregående opplæring. – Felles datainnsamling i alle fem land – Analyser av offentlige registerdata, surveydata og kvalitative data – Longitudinelt perspektiv. – Ledes av et forskningsmiljø i et av landene – Gjennomføres i et samarbeid mellom forskningsmiljøer i alle de fem nordiske landene. Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Clarification of terms: the flow of students through the system

Hva med de som har gjennomført uten å bestå? Er det frafall? Island: ja Danmark: ja Norge: nei Sverige: nei Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Fullføring og frafall Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

School completion as a function of age (2003)

Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010 The percentage of the age group who is registered in any type of formal education in Iceland From the Statistics Iceland, national labour force survey.

Den samfunnsmessige konteksten I takt med økende kompetansekrav: – Et tap for samfunnet: Mister verdifull kompetanse – Et tap for individet: Stiller svakere på arbeidsmarkedet – Eks. Frøseth (2008): Slutterne kommer klart verst ut Konsekvens: Alle bør oppnå så høy kompetanse som mulig gjennom videregående opplæring Når prosent lykkes: videregående opplæring gjør ikke jobben Utfordringen: Bringe flere frem til fullført og bestått videregående opplæring Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Den samfunnsmessige konteksten Skal det være et mål at alle skal bestå videregående opplæring? Skal noen kunne gå gjennom videregående opplæring uten å sikte mot full måloppnåelse? Hva skal utdanningssystemet og samfunnet tilby disse i stedet? Er det forsvarlig å utdanne folk til et lavere nivå enn full kompetanse fra videregående opplæring? Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Tiltak for redusert frafall og bedre gjennomføring

Tiltak for redusert frafall og bedre fullføring i Norden Rådgivning og karriereveiledning – Finland: Prioritert virkemiddel – Danmark: Ungdommens Uddannelsesvejledning – Island: Lovpålagt tilgang til rådgivning – Norge: Partnerskap for karriereveiledning, to nye fag – Internasjonal trend Økt innslag av praksis i yrkesutdanningen – Mindre teori – mer praksis – Finland: mer praksibasert arbeid inn i læreplanene: learning by doing – Sverige: styrke yrkesprofilen i yrkesutdanningene – Danmark: mer praksisorientering i yrkesutdanningene – Norge: Arbeidslivsfag - praksisbrev Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Tiltak for redusert frafall og bedre fullføring i Norden Spesiell oppmerksomhet rundt unge i faresonen som krever ekstra tett oppfølging – Finland: 10.klasse, spes.und., ungdomsverksteder – Island: generelt program, arbeidstreningsprogrammer – Sverige: Det individuelle programmet – Danmark: Ny mesterlære, produksjonsskoler, ungdomsutdannelse for unge med særlige behov – Norge: Lærekandidatordningen, praksisbrev Omfattende reformer – Danmark: 2000 – Island: Under gjennomføring – Sverige: Planlegges – Norge: Reform 94 og Kunnskapsløftet (2006) Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Four perspectives or levels of discourses Society and the school – How society moulds the school, e.g. by credentialism The school in society – How the school is affected by the students being parts of society The school and the student – How the school is affected by its dependence on students The student in the school – How the student can flourish, develop, and be encouraged by the school Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Brings up a number of issues Whom is the school for? Industry, the economy, the new skills, the 21 st century skills Society, its coherence, or harmony, equity, dynamic, democracy The individual, his or her advancement, well being, A considerable effort should be spent probing this Also it should be discussed which problems the school can solve or help to solve; but if not the school, who then? Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Kan bortvalget elimineres? ”arbeidet mot frafall må være ”Hele skolens oppgave”. (…) Arbeidet må være preget av system, ansvarsfordeling og plan, som bidrar til at det blir ”Hele skolens oppgave”, og får en kontinuitet som er nødvendig for å opprettholde en kontinuerlig beredskap”. (Buland og Havn 2007) En effektiv indsats mod frafald bør rettes mod de bagvedliggende sociale problemer, som medfører at unge efter afslutningen af grundskolen ikke kan gennemføre en ungdomsuddannelse. (Helms Jørgensen 2010) Ultimately, the ability to ”solve” the dropout problem (...) may depend more on the country’ ability to address widespread inequalities in the larger social and economic system. (Rumberger 2010) Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Kan bortvalget elimineres? “developmentalist strategies focus on the most vulnerable young people and on those who drop out, or are at risk of dropping out, because of specific developmental and social problems. Young people who drop out, and especially those who become NEET, are disproportionately likely to have low self-esteem and self- efficacy, low social, personal and cognitive skills, family problems, and/or a history of offending, alcohol and drug use or teenage pregnancy. Not all these problems are strictly described as ‘developmental’, but they all invite responses which focus primarily on the individual and his or her problems, rather than on the education system and its cultures and opportunity structures” (Raffe, 2010). Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Kan bortvalget elimineres? The importance of VET On the other hand, evidence from some countries, indicate that VET does not necessarily have to function as a way to increased completion and reduced dropout. The Scottish chapter states that providing vocational programs is not sufficient to guarantee high participation, and further, with reference to Steedman and Stoney (2004) that evidence from other countries suggest that vocational programs may not be the most appropriate way to engage the most disaffected young people. This is supported by the Norwegian case, where the lowest completion rates are found within VET. Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Some issues brought up by the drop-out research The universality of both the problems and patterns The question about the role of the school system and also individual schools or even individual staff The serious issue of what is the downside of a drop-out Intervention at the level of the teacher or councillor the school, school system, the social system Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Thank you Kærar þakkir Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Norway: The growth of female attendance at tertiary level (Universiteter og högskoler) Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Norway: The growth of female attendance at tertiary level (Universiteter og högskoler) Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Norway: The growth of female attendance at tertiary level (Universiteter og högskoler) Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Sweden: Growth coefficients for examination profiles for different female and male age groups: First examination 160 poang or more (four years or more)

Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010 Higher education: enrolment in the US

Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010 Higher education: enrolment in the US

Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010 Higher education: enrolment in the US

Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010 Higher education: enrolment in the US

Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Society and the university Some of the implications of the credentialist or consumerist ethos This is not the sole concern of students, nor even an overriding one, but an important one, and – Students will come to HE education in fairly massive numbers, but the competition (and probably increasingly a serious one) will be among, but probably mainly within the universities, – Many students will adopt a consumer approach to the way they judge or value their programmes and decide to stay or leave. Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Society and the university The gender issue, following Camilla Schreiner, I have come to analyse educational development differently for males and females, because of the systematic and robust differences. I have found in some instances increased polarisation, rather than reduced, e.g. in the choice of subjects. However given the ubiquitous and robust statistical differences, one should constantly be reminded, that boys differ and so do girls. Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The university in society Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The university in society How the university is affected by the students being parts of society, by their age, many of whom are full adult participants in society, and even though they take their studies seriously, they have a host of demanding pressures, commitments, situation constraints, priorities, ambitions, these must be accepted by the institutions, but it is not clear to what extent this must be done nor what the implications are: this is an urgent topic for discussion. Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The university in society The age of students in Nordic HE, % distribution (2007, 2008) Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The university in society The age of students in the Icelandic university system Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The university and the student Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The university and the student How the university is dependent on students, The culture of universities, Humboldt 1809 / Whitehead 1929 H The goals of science and scholarship are worked towards most effectively through the synthesis of the teacher’s and the students’ dispositions. The teacher’s mind is more mature but it is also somewhat one-sided in its development and more dispassionate; the student’s mind is less able and less committed but it is nonetheless open and responsive to every possibility. The two together are a fruitful combination. WThe justification for a university is that it preserves the connection between knowledge and the zest of life, by uniting the young and the old in the imaginative considerations of learning. Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The university and the student In order to fulfil the Humboldt / Whitehead ideal, there must be a temperate number of students, but there are certainly two issues that complicate the situation, i.e. cost and policy. Government policy is twofold, one side is to reduce its financial contribution per student, but the other is to demand wider access, and that a steadily higher proportion of students, not only attend HE institutions, but also complete their courses. These policies are implemented by a very direct and transparent tie between the financial contribution and the FTE; thus the institutions become very dependent on high student throughput, with an obvious threat to quality. This is to me an urgent topic for discussion. Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The student in the university Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The student in the university The point has been implied in the above that it would be problematic to deal with issues within the institution, without taking into account, the three perspectives, already discussed. We must understand in what way the university is seen as a vehicle of advancement, security and status, but of course also and important venue for education, by the student. We must also understand in what way our students, even though keenly interested in their studies, are also active participants in other arenas of society. Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The student in the university Furthermore we must note that we should not treat them as customers, being served, but as our active partners, they are as Humboldt noted, no longer at school, but adult participants in the quest for learning. Something the institutional ethos of mass education tends to ignore, being in danger of turning HE into a robust routine. At the same time we might openly discuss to what extent we treat or serve our students for our somewhat selfish aims of financial well-being. From both these perspectives, those who leave without obtaining their degrees are a particular concern. Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The student in the university A survey A study of those who drop or stop-out from the University of Iceland (May 2008, in Icelandic). Survey of a sample of 350 students originally registered in under- or post-graduate programmes at the University of Iceland, selected from a larger group of dropouts. Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The student in the university Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The student in the university Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

The student in the university Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

English universities: Student workload by subject – highest and lowest institutional mean hours per week (average of 2006 and 2007 results combined) The student in the university, but the institutions differ

Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

Four perspectives Four levels of the discourse suggested Society and the university The university in society The university and the student The student in the university Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

An institutional response to attending and leaving students I have tried to argue above that understanding how choosing to go to university, and then attending, persisting or leaving the institution is very complex and we must be mindful to adopt a number of perspectives in order to understand the students and their behaviour, inter alia their attributions when asked about the university. They live in many worlds, apart from their own. Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010

An institutional response to attending and leaving students I have lately come to the conclusion that we should couch our dilemmas concerning students, in cultural terms. What should be the operational culture of a university? Thus, rather than asking what specific responses might be appropriate when dealing with attending, or leaving students, we might ask ourselves what institutional culture we want to create. A culture that treats the students as co-workers and equals, rather than school students or customers. We should certainly be professional directors of the operation, leaders and mentors, shouldering our full responsibility – with them. Jón Torfi Jónasson - NFS April 2010