How the inputs are turned into outputs, however, is nearly impossible to predict. This makes it all the more difficult to compare country performance in education, and to identify universal factors that lead to improved education results – and better socio-economic outcomes – wherever they are applied.
The Learning Curve is our attempt to do just that. Published by Pearson, it is a wide-ranging programme of quantitative and qualitative analysis which aims to further understanding of the factors that contribute to better education performance. We at the Economist Intelligence Unit collected the data and conducted the analysis that form the Learning Curve. (You can find out more about it here.)
The 60 indicators and 2,500 data points collected from 50 countries enabled us to create an education index, called the Index of Cognitive Skills and Educational Attainment. Building a comparative international index in the sphere of education is anything but a straightforward endeavour, as all manner of data issues and measurement challenges complicate the scoring and comparison of countries. Due to the lack of comparable education data, only 40 countries (or to be exact, 39 countries and Hong Kong) could be included in the index. Our objective in future iterations is to include more countries – and more indicators than the current 11 – as their reporting of education data according to international standards improves.
All these reservations aside, the index gives a good indication of which countries' education systems excel when it comes to developing cognitive skills (in maths, science and reading), promoting literacy and ensuring relatively high graduation rates from tertiary and upper secondary institutions. Finland and South Korea emerge as the strongest performers from this analysis, while those of Hong Kong, Japan and Singapore round out the top five. The UK ranks a respectable sixth in the overall index, while the United States comes in further down the table at 17th.
Looking at the two index leaders, it is in many ways hard to imagine two more different systems: South Korea's is frequently characterised as test-driven and rigid, with students putting in extraordinary work time; the Finnish system is much more relaxed and flexible. Closer examination, though, shows that both countries develop high-quality teachers, value accountability and have a moral mission that underlies education efforts.
Our attempt to identify strong relationships between education inputs and outputs leads to the conclusion the most important drivers of better education are likely to be found in the local environment rather than being universally applicable factors. Finland and South Korea bear this out, but the importance of a strong moral commitment to education in society as well as a healthy respect for the teaching profession appear to among those few universal factors that truly matter.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited (EIU) or any other member of The Economist Group. The Economist Group (including the EIU) cannot accept any responsibility or liability for reliance by any person on this article or any of the information, opinions or conclusions set out in the article.
