Education has never been more measurable. Around the world, ministries and school boards track test scores, graduation rates, international rankings, and program outputs with increasing precision. Dashboards tell us what is happening, but they rarely explain why students struggle with belonging or why teachers are leaving in growing numbers.
The warning signs are clear. Teacher attrition is rising across OECD countries — more than six per cent of qualified teachers left the profession in 2022–23, with rates above ten per cent in countries such as Denmark, Estonia, and Lithuania. UNESCO reports that primary-level teacher attrition nearly doubled globally between 2015 and 2022. In Canada and elsewhere, students report higher levels of loneliness and weaker senses of belonging, even when academic indicators appear stable.
This paradox — being data-rich but insight-poor — signals that measurement alone is not enough. Data has value, but true improvement depends on disciplined inquiry, professional judgment, and steady cycles of learning and adaptation.
The Measurement Eras
For more than a century, education research has shifted between two impulses: psychology, which sought to understand growth, and measurement, which offered quantifiable proof of institutional effectiveness. Over time, measurement has dominated.
-
Legitimacy Era (1890s–1910s):
Thorndike’s psychometrics gave education a scientific veneer that secured credibility. -
Efficiency Era (1920s–40s):
Depression-era budgets elevated measurable objectives as practical tools, even as Piaget’s developmental insights proved harder to apply. -
Competitiveness & Accountability Era (1950s–70s):
Post-Sputnik, evaluation science thrived as governments demanded proof of results. -
Accountability & Comparability Era (1980s–present):
Neoliberal reforms reframed education as an auditable system. PISA globalized measurement but often reduced complex learning into checklists.
Each era reflected its own priorities. Together, they explain why today’s systems measure with extraordinary precision, yet still struggle to generate insight or sustain improvement.
Why This Matters Now
The consequences of over-reliance on measurement are increasingly visible. Teacher attrition signals more than labour shortages — it points to questions of workload, purpose, and belonging. Students’ reports of loneliness reveal issues no standardized test can capture. Employers are voicing doubts about whether schools are preparing learners for adaptability, civic capacity, and collaborative work in democratic societies.
Measurement will always play a role. But it cannot, on its own, explain why challenges persist or how to address them. For that, systems must turn back to inquiry — and to the relentless, incremental work of improvement.
Improvement in Practice at OISE CPL
At OISE Continuing & Professional Learning, this approach is framed as Improvement in Practice. The principle is straightforward: improvement is not a destination but a way of working. It requires being relentless in focus, but incremental in practice.
Three commitments consistently prove essential:
- Equity and belonging as the lens. Change that ignores cultural realities and context is rarely sustained.
- Inquiry and implementation as the method. Systems improve through cycles of asking, testing, adapting, and scaling — not through one-off reforms.
- Well-being as the condition. Improvement depends on the resilience and energy of the people who carry it forward.
These commitments are embedded through OISE CPL’s Partnership Inquiry Model, which ensures collaborations with ministries, schools, and universities are:
- Evidence-informed — tested for need, fit, and sustainability.
- Partnership-driven — co-designed with educators and leaders rather than imposed.
- Improvement-focused — embedding tools and playbooks that support ongoing learning.
- Sustainable — building capacity so gains endure beyond the life of a project.
Looking Ahead
OECD’s Education at a Glance warns of worsening teacher shortages across most member states. UNESCO estimates nearly 44 million additional teachers will be needed worldwide by 2030. At the same time, concerns about student well-being and democratic resilience are mounting.
These are not challenges a dashboard can solve. They require systems willing to be both relentless and incremental — relentless in their pursuit of equity, belonging, and learning outcomes, and incremental in building solutions that last.
The purpose of education has never been to produce numbers. Its purpose is to prepare people to live, work, and act together. To achieve this, systems must move from being data-rich but insight-poor to adopting practices that create meaningful, sustainable improvement.
By Dr. Elisabeth Rees-Johnstone, Executive Director, OISE Continuing & Professional Learning
September 29, 2025
