The importance of data
It is no secret that policymakers usually prefer statistical data for decision-making which is often viewed as being more reliable, but this is not necessarily the case. What is important is the rigour and reliability of the data, the scope and context of the exercise, and that it gets communicated and used, if appropriate.
The importance of data cannot be overstated. Good quality data is essential in the development of education policies, the earmarking of resources and in assessing the implementation of programmes. As Hugues Moussy, Head of Systems Performance and Assessment Unit at the ETF, pointed out in a blog article on the importance of data:
“Data is not just about shaping policy dialogue and advice, but where you want to invest in the system, be it in people, innovation, training or the like.”
How data is used
The ETF works in partnership to produce data and expand data use with other EU institutions and agencies, international intergovernmental organisations, regional organisations such as the Education Reform Initiative of South Eastern Europe (ERI SEE), bilateral donor organisations, and the private sector.
Data collected and analysed at a national and international level by the ETF and partner organisations, such as sister EU agency Cedefop, has been crucial in providing a comprehensive overview of education and skills needs. Over the past decade, data has been used to better understand the modernisation process of vocational education and training (VET) systems, and the implementation of human capital development and lifelong learning policies.
The ETF’s data collection, processing and analysis has enabled the monitoring and the evaluation of policies and reforms, both within and across countries. The ETF is involved in various monitoring exercises, as requested by partner countries and the European Commission. This includes the monitoring of policy and system performance within the Torino Process, the monitoring of VET in EU candidate countries under the Osnabrück Declaration, and the introduction and monitoring of the Youth Guarantee in the Western Balkans region.
The ETF’s Key Indicators on Education, Skills and Employment (KIESE) report holds a bounty of statistics on the main findings and results from the 2022 data collection. This has enabled a review of developments in the field of education, skills and employment in the partner countries. A statistical snapshot of the indictors also allows the ETF partner countries and the seven EU candidate countries to reference themselves with the EU.
The report also discusses the results from more recent ETF work on youth transition and skills mismatch. For instance, in partner countries, one-third of all employed adults and up to 40% of young people are overqualified for the jobs they hold, noted Mircea Badescu, ETF Human Capital Development Statistician, at a May event, Consolidation of Evidence on Active Labour Market Policies and Transition to Work.
Other areas in which the ETF contributes to improving data intelligence in partner countries for better policymaking in education and training include graduate tracer studies and regular surveys on issues such as the professional development of teachers and trainers.
The ETF also undertakes targeted country-specific data collection such as the ETF monitoring and collation of data on the impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on schools, education and labour markets. See the latest update.
What are the challenges?
The ETF draws on data from international databases, where available, as there is a clear methodology and quality assurance, which allows for comparisons to be drawn. There are gaps on certain elements of countries’ education and training systems in international databases, especially in developing and transition countries as in many of the ETF’s partner countries.
The ETF’s Torino Process launched 13 years ago is in its sixth review. The Process involves collecting quantitative data in three areas of system performance: access, participation, and opportunities for lifelong learning; quality of lifelong learning outcomes; and system organisation. The monitoring framework has eight dimensions (which are subdivided into 30 outcomes). For each dimension, different quantitative databases are used, such as Eurostat, UNESCO, and the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), with 130 item responses from the database then aggregated by the ETF.
A challenge is that data may be missing at international level, making it harder to draw comparisons. The Torino Process exercise attempts to redress this issue through the gathering of qualitative and contextual country data drawing upon its long experience working with key stakeholders at national level.
As the KIESE report noted,
“Data availability varies greatly among partner countries and remains the most significant challenge. Although the coverage of labour market statistics is satisfactory, the availability of other indicators, in particular for adult training, remains limited. Only very few countries provide information on educational outcomes such as graduate employability and early leavers.”
To address such shortcomings, there is a need for more cooperation at the EU and international levels, and the development of skills intelligence at national level. The ETF has joined forces with partners such as Cedefop, the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working aConditions (Eurofound), the ILO and the OECD to consolidate its role in monitoring, the sharing of data and findings, and the conducting of surveys, such as the European Skills and Jobs Survey, which is being done jointly with Cedefop, and the Living, Working and Covid-19 survey done jointly with Eurofound.
The ETF draws upon nationally generated evidence produced by central statistical offices, social partners, civil society, think tanks, universities and other research organisations for its country and thematic knowledge based on various topics, such as qualifications, quality assurance, work-based learning, platform work, digitalisation, career guidance, skills needs.
Responding to policymakers on ‘what works’ for investing in VET for instance, often has no straightforward answer but the ETF works to elaborate sound options based on quality data using both quantitative and qualitative methods complemented with experience-based information and expert knowledge. Indeed, the latter is one of the key contributors to evidence outlined in the European Commission’s publication Support Mechanisms for Evidence-based Policy-Making in Education.
