外文翻譯--教育的公平與質(zhì)量

1、<p>　　中文5000字，2900單詞，16500英文字符</p><p>　　Equity and Quality in Education</p><p>　　Supporting Disadvantaged Students and Schools</p><p><b>　　FOREWORD</b></p>&

2、lt;p>　　Globalization of the economy, increasingly diverse and interconnected populations, and rapid technological change are posing new and demanding challenges to individuals and societies alike. School systems are r

3、ethinking the knowledge and skills students will need for success and the educational strategies and systems required for all children to achieve them. In both Asia and North America, urban school systems are at the locu

4、s of change in policy and practice – at once the sites of the most cri</p><p>　　A critical element of high-performing school systems is that they not only benchmark the practices of other countries, but they

5、 systematically adapt and implement these practices within their own cultural and political contexts. The Global Cities Education Network is intended as a mechanism for educators and decision-makers in Asia and North Ame

6、rica to collaboratively dream, design, and deliver internationally informed solutions to common challenges with which education systems are currently gra</p><p>　　The Network engages in cycles of in-depth in

7、quiry, planning, and action to address specific topics related to the themes of transforming learning and achieving equity. Each cycle involves knowledge sharing and problem solving, including at Global Cities Education

8、Network Symposia and the production of research and knowledge products such as case studies, background papers, and meeting reports. The overarching goal is to develop practical wisdom from the research and experience of

9、 the world’s lea</p><p>　　This report presents the key recommendations of the OECD publication Equity and Quality in Education: Supporting Disadvantaged Students and Schools (2012a), which maps out policy le

10、vers that can help build high quality and equitable education systems, with a particular focus on North American and Asian-Pacific countries. It has been prepared by the OECD Education Directorate with support from the A

11、sia Society as a Background Report for the first Asia Society Global Cities Network Symposium, Hong</p><p>　　We would like to thank the sponsors of the Global Cities Education Network including: JPMorgan Cha

12、se Foundation, MetLife Foundation, Carnegie Corporation, Pearson Foundation, and Hewlett Foundation.</p><p>　　We hope that this series of reports provides knowledge and experience useful to cities in Asia, N

13、orth America, and elsewhere eager to create the conditions that will promote success for all students in today’s interconnected world.</p><p>　　1. EQUITY IN EDUCATION: A KEY CHALLENGE</p><p>　　T

14、he highest performing education systems are those that combine quality with equity. Equity in education means that personal or social circumstances such as gender, ethnic origin or family background, are not obstacles to

15、 achieving educational potential (definition of fairness) and that all individuals reach at least a basic minimum level of skills (definition of inclusion). In these education systems, the vast majority of students have

16、the opportunity to attain high level skills, regardless of </p><p>　　Yet, even in high performing systems a significant number of students fail to obtain a minimum level of education,jeopardizing their own f

17、uture and the progress of their society. The degree of inclusion of an education system can be measured by the percentage of low performers and individuals who do not attain upper secondary education (OECD, 2012a). In PI

18、SA 2009, 19% of 15-year-old students scored below Level 2 in reading across OECD countries, which signals that almost one out of five youngste</p><p>　　Students’ background has a significant impact on their

19、academic achievement in many countries, and often, low socio-economic background and low performance converge in specific population groups. The increased likelihood of disadvantaged students to perform below level 2 can

20、 be interpreted as an indicator of fairness of an education system (OECD, 2012a). For example, in Korea, the few students that do not achieve basic skills are often disadvantaged students. In this country, students from

21、low s</p><p>　　Reducing school failure pays off for both society and individual and contributes to economic growth and social development. The economic and social costs of school failure and dropout are high

22、, whereas investing early in education (Heckman, 2011) and up until upper secondary education completion is efficient. Individuals with at least upper secondary education have better employment and healthier lifestyle pr

23、ospects, resulting in greater contributions to public investment through higher taxes. M</p><p>　　Education is a central element of OECD countries’ growth strategies. To be effective in the long run, improve

24、ments in education need to enable all students to have access to quality education early, to stay in the system until at least the end of upper secondary education, and to obtain the skills and knowledge they will need f

25、or effective social and labour market integration. Thiscanbe done with two parallel strategies:</p><p>　　By designing education systems that are conducive to equity: More specifically, some systemic practi

26、ces, such as early tracking, repetition, certain school choice schemes or low quality vocational education and training tend to amplify social and economic disadvantages and are conducive to school failure. Section 2 rev

27、iews system level practices that hinder equity and provides five recommendations to prevent failure and promote the completion of upper secondary education. This can help reinforce</p><p>　　By focusing on an

28、d supporting disadvantaged schools: Schools with higher proportions of disadvantaged students are at greater risk of problems that can result in under performance, affecting education systems as a whole. Low performing d

29、isadvantaged schools often lack the internal capacity or support to improve, as school leaders and teachers and the environments of schools, classrooms and neighbourhoods frequently fail to offer a quality learning exper

30、ience for the most disadvantaged. Section 3</p><p>　　Addressing these challenges is a difficult endeavour in any country. Improvements across an entire education system can come only with strong and consiste

31、nt political support and leadership sustained over time. It also requires policy design and implementation that is aligned to governance structures. In this regard, setting high achievement targets or standards is import

32、ant to raise the bar and signal equity priorities (Section 4).</p><p>　　2.TACKLING SYSTEM LEVEL POLICIES THAT HINDER EQUITY IN EDUCATION</p><p>　　Education systems and the pathways through them

33、need to be designed in a way that both enhances equity and raises students’ success. Yet, some system level policies, such as grade repetition or early tracking, tend to amplify socio-economic disparities and are conduci

34、ve to disengagement and dropout, whereas other policies seem to mitigate them (Causa and Chapuis, 2009). This section presents and develops five specific system level policy levers that can reduce inequities in education

35、 and contrib</p><p>　　2.1. Eliminate grade repetition</p><p>　　Challenge: grade repetition is a common practice in many OECD countries</p><p>　　Grade repetition occurs when students

36、, after a formal or informal assessment, are held back in the same grade for an additional year, rather than being promoted to the next stage along with their peers. Grade repetition is practised in many OECD countries:

37、13% of 15-year-olds are reported to have repeated at least one year either in primary or secondary school (Figure 2.2). This proportion is particularly high in the partner economy Macao-China, where it affects over 40% o

38、f students. School syst</p><p>　　Evidence: high and lasting costs, while benefits are slight and short-lived</p><p>　　The costs of grade repetition are large for both individuals and society. Fi

39、rst, the direct costs for school systems are very high, as these include providing an additional year of education and delaying entry to the labour market by a year. Second, it increases the likelihood of earning no qual

40、ification or only a lower secondary one, while the academic benefits of grade retention are slight and short-lived as these accrue from going over the same curricula a second time (Jacob and Lefgren, 2009</p><

41、p>　　In many countries, schools have few incentives to take into account the high costs grade repetition bears on the system. On one hand, both the additional and opportunity costs do not decrease the funding that indi

42、vidual schools receive (Field, Kuczera and Pont, 2007), while alternative practices that can reduce the use of repetition very often have direct costs for schools. On the other hand, teachers widely support the practice

43、as they observe the immediate gains but not the long-term negative </p><p>　　Preventive measures: ensure continuous assessment and support strategies. The most successful alternatives are focused on preventi

44、on to make repetition unnecessary, providing the needed support to those falling behind before the end of the school year and putting them back on track on time, before the learning gaps widen, as done in Finland and Jap

45、an (See Box 2.1). Continuous assessment of students’ needs can facilitate the design and implementation of tailored support programmes as early as pos</p><p>　　Promotion with support. Repetition rates can be

46、 reduced by restricting the criteria that determine whether a student is to be held back and by establishing further opportunities to move forward. However, promotion should be combined with a structured and engaging pla

47、n of support to correct educational deficits and meet the educational standards. Also, repetition can be limited to the subjects or modules failed instead of year-repetition. For example, in Canada, New Zealand and the U

48、nited States,</p><p>　　Reversing the culture of grade repetition in schools. Educational authorities should raise teacher awareness of its consequences, offer support and resources, and also include teachers

49、 and school leaders in searching for alternatives to help students with learning difficulties. In addition, financial incentives and targets for reduction of repetition can be introduced into accountability systems. For

50、example, in France repetition levels have substantially decreased since specific targets to hold</p><p>　　2.2 Avoid early tracking and defer student selection to upper secondary</p><p>　　Challen

51、ge: early student selection is a common practice</p><p>　　Student selection refers to tracking students into different study programmes or grouping them into classrooms according to their abilities, either i

52、n all or few subjects. Selection occurs in all OECD countries, but there are important differences between countries in the timing and form of this selection. With an average age of first formal selection at 14 years acr

53、oss OECD (OECD, 2010b), some countries, such as Finland, Norway or Spain, have non-selective and comprehensive school systems up to</p><p>　　Evidence: academic selection widens achievement gaps and inequitie

54、s</p><p>　　Proponents of grouping students according to their performance suggest that students learn better when grouped with others like themselves and when teaching can be adapted to their needs. In contr

55、ast, evidence shows that early student selection has a negative impact on students assigned to lower tracks, without raising the performance of the whole student population (Hanushek and Woessmann, 2006). Less demanding

56、tracks tend to provide less stimulating learning environments and fuel a vicious cyc</p><p>　　In addition, selection exacerbates inequities since students from disadvantaged backgrounds are more likely to be

57、 placed in the least academically oriented tracks or groups (Spinath and Spinath, 2005). For example, students with an immigrant background, when tracked at an early stage, may be locked into a lower educational environm

58、ent before they have had a chance to develop the linguistic, social and cultural skills to attain their maximum potential (OECD, 2010c).</p><p>　　Delay selection and adopt comprehensive schooling until upper

59、 secondary school. Many OECD countries have adopted comprehensive education measures, and raised the age of first tracking or postponed it to a later stage of the educational process – most commonly to the end of lower s

60、econdary education. The Nordic countries were among the first to make the change in the 1970s and became a reference of comprehensive education systems. One of the most recent reforms was undertaken in Poland, where ear&

61、lt;/p><p>　　Reduce the level of early tracking by eliminating low level tracks. In contexts where key stakeholders may be reluctant to end early tracking, suppressing low-level tracks or groups or ensuring that

62、 these offer equivalent education opportunities and outcomes to other pathways can mitigate some of the negative effects of tracking. This could be particularly beneficial in systems in which there are different and very

63、 impermeable tracks in a hierarchy. In recent years, Austria, Luxembourg, Slovak R</p><p>　　Limit the negative effects of early selection. In countries where students are tracked, streamed or grouped by abil

64、ity early, a variety of policies and practices can be explored to limit the negative effects and embrace differentiated instruction in mixed-ability settings. One option is to limit ability grouping to specific subjects

65、or replace it with short-term flexible grouping for specific purposes, while classes remain heterogeneous. For instance, Nordic countries use temporary groupings wit</p><p>　　2.3. Manage school choice to avo

66、id segregation and increased inequities</p><p>　　Challenge: school choice is a reality in OECD countries</p><p>　　In the last 25 years, more than two-thirds of OECD countries have increased the

67、extent of parental school choice in publicly (and in some countries also privately) funded schools. Advocates often argue that school choice would allow all students – including disadvantaged ones and those attending low

68、 performing schools – to opt for higher quality schools, as the introduction of choice in education can foster efficiency, spur innovation and raise quality overall. The evidence however shows that ch</p><p>

69、;　　Research has shown that oversubscribed schools are selective in their admissions and tend to prefer students who are easier to teach and more able to learn, crowding out students with low performance</p><p&

70、gt;<b>　　教育的公平與質(zhì)量</b></p><p>　　———支持弱勢學(xué)生與學(xué)校</p><p><b>　　前言：</b></p><p>　　全球化的經(jīng)濟、日益密切的人群聯(lián)系以及快速的技術(shù)變革正在給人類和整個社會帶來巨大的挑戰(zhàn)。教育系統(tǒng)正在反思目前學(xué)生所具備的知識和技能能否成功達到教育戰(zhàn)略對兒童培養(yǎng)的要求。在亞

71、洲和北美地區(qū)，城市的教學(xué)系統(tǒng)是遵循政策實施的軌跡的。這就是在最關(guān)鍵的挑戰(zhàn)和最創(chuàng)新的工程所需要解決的問題。因此，亞洲協(xié)會舉辦的全球城市教育網(wǎng)組織，一個在北美和亞洲的網(wǎng)站，去動用所有的城市教育資源從中尋找機遇與挑戰(zhàn)并改善他們。一個高效的教學(xué)系統(tǒng)的關(guān)鍵因素是，他們不僅將其他國家的做法用作參考，而且在自己的文化和政治背景下適應(yīng)并且實施這些做法。全球城市教育網(wǎng)的目的是一種為教育工作者設(shè)計的機制，同時亞洲和北美洲的決策者為了協(xié)作的提供一種符合國際實

72、情的解決方案，而且這一教育系統(tǒng)與目前的教育資源結(jié)合情況良好。將網(wǎng)絡(luò)技術(shù)運用到深入地調(diào)查、計劃和執(zhí)行以解決某些關(guān)于如何實現(xiàn)教育公平的主題上。在全球城市網(wǎng)絡(luò)教育研討會上以案例研究等形式，每輪會議的議題都包括知識的分享和問題的解決。其總體目標是從研究和經(jīng)驗中發(fā)展處實際的智慧，并以此證明網(wǎng)絡(luò)城市是有前途的，并可以用來加強網(wǎng)絡(luò)的有效性以及發(fā)展世界各地的城市教育系統(tǒng)。本報告主要介紹了來自經(jīng)合組織關(guān)于</p><p>　　教育

73、公平：一個關(guān)鍵的挑戰(zhàn)</p><p>　　高效的教育體系是指那些質(zhì)量與公平相結(jié)合。教育公平是指個人或社會的情況，如性別，種族或家庭背景不構(gòu)成實現(xiàn)教育潛力（公平的定義）和所有個人達到技能（包括定義）至少有一個基本的最低水平的障礙。在這些教育系統(tǒng)中，學(xué)生絕大多數(shù)有機會獲得高層次的技能，無論自己的個人和社會經(jīng)濟情況。以亞太地區(qū)為例，韓國，上海，中國和日本的教育系統(tǒng)是在質(zhì)量和公平上以達到較高水準的幾個例子。在北美，加拿大

74、這樣的國家也是如此。</p><p>　　然而，即使是在高性能系統(tǒng)中，一定數(shù)量的學(xué)生仍然無法獲得最基本的教育，這將阻礙他們的未來以及整個社會的進步。納入教育體系的程度可以通過無法獲得高中教育個體的數(shù)量占整體的百分比來衡量（經(jīng)濟合作與發(fā)展組織，2012）。2009年的國際學(xué)生評估項目中，經(jīng)濟合作與發(fā)展組織國家中，19％的15歲學(xué)生在閱讀項目中獲得了低于等級二的成績，這就意味著幾乎五分之一的經(jīng)合組織國家中的青年人缺乏

75、基本的識字能力，在某些國家這個比例甚至高于25%。那些缺乏基本技能的青年會從教育系統(tǒng)中輟學(xué)，并且不會完成高中教育，他們僅僅擁有低技能，并且毫無準備地進入勞動力市場。要是他們繼續(xù)學(xué)習的話，這就意味著他們將比同齡人付出更多的努力和需要更多（昂貴）的支持。事實上，在經(jīng)合組織國家中25-34歲的孩子沒有達到高中教育的比例達到將近20%。盡管差異性非常大，韓國這一比例為3％，然而在土耳其這一比例高達62％（經(jīng)合組織，2011）。</p>

76、;<p>　　學(xué)生背景在許多國家對他們的學(xué)業(yè)成就有很顯著的影響，通常情況下，低社會經(jīng)濟背景和低效能會集合在特定人群中。弱勢學(xué)生在測試中低于等級二的數(shù)量的增加將被解讀為是教育系統(tǒng)公平性的一個指標（經(jīng)合組織，2012）。例如，在韓國，沒有達到基本的技能的少數(shù)學(xué)生往往被認定為弱勢學(xué)生。在這個國家，來自于低社會經(jīng)濟地位的學(xué)生表現(xiàn)出低效能的可能性比來自高地位的學(xué)生高3.5倍。降低學(xué)業(yè)失敗的可能性對個人或者社會以及社會經(jīng)濟的發(fā)展都很有

77、幫助。學(xué)業(yè)失敗和輟學(xué)的經(jīng)濟社會成本很高，然而早一些投資并且持續(xù)到高中完成的做法更有效率。一個至少獲得高中教育的人擁有更好的就業(yè)和健康的生活，導(dǎo)致他通過繳納高稅收向公共社會給與更多貢獻。更多受過教育的人致力于可持續(xù)發(fā)展的經(jīng)濟，同時較少的依賴公共援助和較少受到經(jīng)濟衰退的影響，反過來更好的促進社會公平發(fā)展（經(jīng)合組織，2011年）。教育是經(jīng)合組織國家發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略的核心要素。為了長期運行有效，能夠從教育中收獲益處必須讓學(xué)生盡可能接觸優(yōu)質(zhì)的教育，并且盡

78、可能能夠呆到高中教育結(jié)束，以確保獲得足夠的技能和知識，這些技能和知識會對他們在職場上找到自己的為止有所幫助。有兩個非常重要的戰(zhàn)略可以實施：</p><p>　　·通過設(shè)計一個有利于教育公平的教育系統(tǒng)：更具體的說是，早期的追蹤、重復(fù)、確認學(xué)生沒有選擇一個低質(zhì)量的教育計劃，這往往會放大社會和經(jīng)濟的劣勢，從而導(dǎo)致學(xué)業(yè)的失敗。第二部分評估系統(tǒng)實施情況，并提供五項建議避免學(xué)業(yè)失敗，促進高中教育的競爭。這可以幫助強

79、化整個系統(tǒng)公平，所有這些行為對貧困學(xué)生都是非常有利的，同時又不會妨礙其他學(xué)生的學(xué)習進度。</p><p>　　·通過關(guān)注和支持弱勢學(xué)校：學(xué)校擁有弱勢學(xué)生的比例越高，面臨問題的風險的比例也越高，這可能影響作為一個整體的教育系統(tǒng)。低效的弱勢學(xué)校常常缺乏有能力的人才的支持。按照經(jīng)驗，作為學(xué)校的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)和老師，教師和社區(qū)環(huán)境，沒法提供優(yōu)質(zhì)的學(xué)習必須條件是導(dǎo)致弱勢學(xué)校的關(guān)鍵因素。第三章節(jié)提出了五項政策建議以達到有效支

80、持弱勢學(xué)校的發(fā)展。雖然這適用于所有學(xué)校，但是他們對低效的弱勢學(xué)校尤其有效，因為這樣做，他們更有可能實現(xiàn)自身的進步。</p><p>　　在任何國家，應(yīng)對這些挑戰(zhàn)都是一項艱巨的任務(wù)。強大而持續(xù)的政府支持以及領(lǐng)導(dǎo)持續(xù)的關(guān)注只能對教育系統(tǒng)發(fā)展的影響起到短暫的效果。這還需要政策在設(shè)計和實施過程中考慮到自身結(jié)構(gòu)的問題，從這方面講，設(shè)置一個高的目標以及設(shè)立高標準對提升整體教育公平有更顯著的作用。（第四章節(jié)）</p>

81、;<p>　　追蹤制度層面的政策如何阻礙教育公平</p><p>　　教育系統(tǒng)以及實現(xiàn)教育公平的途徑需要被設(shè)計出來，既強化公平也能使學(xué)生成功。然而，一些制度層面的政策，例如六級和提前跟蹤，都能放大社會經(jīng)濟差距，促使輟學(xué)行為的發(fā)生，而其他政策卻能緩解他們（Causa和Chapuis，2009年）。本節(jié)提出并發(fā)展處五個具體的制度層面的政策杠桿，用以減少教育不平等并有助于提高整體的性能。</p>

82、;<p><b>　　2.1消除留級</b></p><p>　　難題：留級是經(jīng)合組織國家的普遍做法</p><p>　　留級主要發(fā)生在，當一個學(xué)生經(jīng)過正式或者非正式的評估，必須在同一水平再進行一年的額外學(xué)習，而不是和他的同齡人一樣晉升到人生的下一個學(xué)習階段。留級普遍發(fā)生在許多經(jīng)合組織國家：13%的15歲學(xué)生被報道需要至少留級一年的小學(xué)課程。這一比例在中

83、國澳門特別高，在中國澳門這一比例高達40%。在教育系統(tǒng)中，學(xué)校通過留級這樣低效的方式完成重復(fù)工作。而在戰(zhàn)略層面，每個國家都有自己的更高效的操作計劃。</p><p>　　事實：高昂且持續(xù)的成本帶來的好處缺失輕微和短暫的。</p><p>　　對于個人和社會，留級的代價是非常巨大的。首先，對于教育系統(tǒng)的直接成本非常巨大，因為這一系列舉措將為留級生多提供一年的教育，同時推遲一年進入勞動力市場。

84、其次，這也增加了只有初中學(xué)歷以及沒有更高資格的可能性。同時留級帶來的學(xué)術(shù)利益是輕微且短暫的。第三，留級會擴大教育的不公平，受到低社會經(jīng)濟背景的影響，未受過教育或者有移民背景的父母可能會讓其子女有更大可能性發(fā)生輟學(xué)行為。</p><p>　　在許多國家，學(xué)校有幾個誘因，導(dǎo)致高昂的成本和重復(fù)修讀的制度，一方面，無論附加成本和機會成本是否降低，個別學(xué)校都會接受資助，而另外一種做法是減少學(xué)校可以重復(fù)使用的直接成本。另一方

85、面，教師廣泛支持的做法卻并是短期且負面的影響，將較弱的學(xué)生分配的下一年需要教師花費更多精力和更具挑戰(zhàn)性的能力，為此他們大多都沒做好準備，并且對這樣的做法并不支持。</p><p>　　預(yù)防措施：確保持續(xù)不斷的評估行為和與之配套的支持策略。最成功的替代留級的方法就是能預(yù)防出現(xiàn)這樣不必要的重復(fù)，在學(xué)期結(jié)束前對落后進度的學(xué)生提供必要的支持，讓他們重新回到賽道上，正如芬蘭和日本所做的那樣。對學(xué)生持續(xù)不斷的評估需要對學(xué)生實

86、施量身定做。具體的措施包括提高教師多樣化教學(xué)的能力，擴大教師的學(xué)習機會，提供多樣化的戰(zhàn)略，目的是為了強化學(xué)生學(xué)習元只是的能力。</p><p>　　·促進與支持，重讀率可以通過限制條件來達到降低重讀率的效果。確定一個學(xué)生是否要重讀必須建立進一步的評估機制阻礙重讀發(fā)生的容易程度。然而，替身必須使結(jié)構(gòu)化和計劃相結(jié)合，來達到教育公平的目的。此外，重讀可以限制失敗，而不是每年遭受重讀困擾的學(xué)生。例如在加拿大、新

87、西蘭和美國，保留通常僅限于特定學(xué)科的失敗，學(xué)生可以選擇加強數(shù)學(xué)學(xué)習，保留語文學(xué)習。</p><p>　　·在學(xué)校重新流行起留級文化的時候，教育專家應(yīng)該有足夠清醒的認識到這個行為所帶來的后果，提供支持和資源，也包含教師、學(xué)校領(lǐng)導(dǎo)尋找合適的替代來幫助學(xué)生正確認識困難。除此之外，財政激勵措施以及引入問責制度能有效減少重讀的事情發(fā)生。例如，在法國重讀率就有大幅度下降，因為在法國的學(xué)校，在建立留級的制度基礎(chǔ)之上還

88、建立了個性化的追趕機會。</p><p>　　2.2避免過早的跟蹤學(xué)業(yè)，并且推遲學(xué)生的選擇</p><p>　　學(xué)生選擇時機到跟蹤學(xué)生進入不同研究項目，將他們進行分組，更具自己能力的教師，所有選擇出自經(jīng)合組織國家，但也有國家在定時和形式上有重要區(qū)別選擇。一些經(jīng)合組織國家的平均年齡在14歲左右，一些如芬蘭、挪威和西班牙隨著初中教育的結(jié)束也無法進行選擇合適的綜合學(xué)校。其他國家，如奧地利和德國，

89、通過課程的此外，有不同排序和難度水平的不同設(shè)置，根據(jù)兒童自己的學(xué)習需求和學(xué)術(shù)潛力來安排他們學(xué)習。在美國和加拿大，有90%的15歲的學(xué)生在學(xué)校習得通識能力。這些在學(xué)生時代早期的行為可能會造成更大的不平等和教育不公平現(xiàn)象。</p><p>　　根據(jù)學(xué)生表現(xiàn)進行分組的支持者認為，當別人喜歡自己組合和教學(xué)的學(xué)生學(xué)得更好，就可以適應(yīng)他們的需求。在相反，有證據(jù)表明，早期的學(xué)生對分配給學(xué)生帶來負面影響，在不提高整體學(xué)生人數(shù)的性

90、能。要求不高的渠道往往會提供較少的啟發(fā)性的學(xué)習環(huán)境，此外，學(xué)生被要求完成苛刻的題目能從積極的影響中獲益。有證據(jù)表明，學(xué)生被分配了途徑對他們的教育和生活前景產(chǎn)生很大的影響。</p><p>　　此外，選擇加劇了不平等，因為來自弱勢的學(xué)生更可能受到不公平的教育。例如，學(xué)生有移民背景，當在早期階段在一個較低的教育環(huán)境中進行學(xué)習，在他們開發(fā)語言之前，社會和文化技能能首先發(fā)揮其最大潛能。</p><p&

91、gt;　　延遲到高中進行自主選擇綜合大學(xué)。許多經(jīng)合組織國家已經(jīng)通過了全面的教育措施，并且將自主選擇的教育往后推遲。最常見的是初中教育階段結(jié)束。最早這么做的是北歐國家，在20世界70年代，成為全面教育體系的一個參考。北歐國家中的一個國家，波蘭就進行了改革，在波蘭，推遲一年進行自主選擇，從學(xué)生表現(xiàn)來看，對于分配到職業(yè)軌道的學(xué)生來說并不妨礙發(fā)展其職業(yè)技能。</p><p>　　通過減少低水平的追蹤來降低早期追蹤，上下文

92、中的關(guān)鍵是，利益相關(guān)者可能不愿意提前結(jié)束跟蹤，抑制低水平的團隊，或者確保能夠提供教育機會的均等。某些途徑可以減輕一些追蹤帶來的負面影響。這可能對于教育系統(tǒng)而言是非常有利的，其中有不同層次結(jié)構(gòu)的方式。近年來，奧地利，盧森堡，斯洛伐克共和國和德國的一些州都已經(jīng)采取了上述方法。</p><p>　　限制早期選擇的一些負面影響。在一些國家，對于學(xué)生的跟蹤調(diào)查，運用各種各樣的政策或做法加以分組，以此來限制它帶來的負面影響，

93、同時接納差異化結(jié)構(gòu)帶來的變化，一種選擇是限制能力的分組，以特定主題或者短期的替代為目的靈活的分組，而不是不同類別進行分組，例如，在北歐國家使用臨時分組來增加組的多樣性，這就保證了組的靈活性，一次滿足學(xué)業(yè)的具體需求，另外一種選擇是增加教師團隊和教室的靈活性，并豐富選擇不同組別的途徑。另一種選擇是，確保所有的方法能給學(xué)生一個具有挑戰(zhàn)性的課程和高品質(zhì)的教學(xué)。</p><p>　　2.3 管理擇校，避免隔離和不平等現(xiàn)象的

94、增加</p><p>　　在過去的25年中，超過三分之二的經(jīng)合組織國家家長自主選擇公立（也有私立）的學(xué)校的程度。主張通常認為，所有學(xué)生都有自主選擇更高品質(zhì)學(xué)校的權(quán)力，包括哪些弱勢群體和那些低效的學(xué)校，例如引進更好的教育來促進高效運作，促進創(chuàng)新，提高整體質(zhì)量。然而，證據(jù)表明這樣的選擇，如果沒有良好的管理，則有可能產(chǎn)生更大的不平等，也沒有提高整體水平的可能性。</p><p>　　有研究表明，