Education matters a lot in the fight against corruption in any country of the world. Corruption in education and lack of integrity have a wide reaching negative impact. They affect the quality, effectiveness and credibility of education, the efficiency of provision and the equity of opportunities for youth which is the biggest asset of any country and its social, cultural, scientific, and economic prosperity. There are numerous good reasons to treat corruption in the education sector as a priority problem. The Integrity of Education Systems (INTES) assessment aims to support governments in their effort to prevent corruption in the education sector, to help them uncover and address the underlying systemic causes of malpractice and inefficiency, and prevent these from happening. The INTES methodology includes a scan/perusal of system indicators and survey data (i.e. PISA), on-site visits and stakeholder interviews combined with qualitative analysis to identify areas of concern and reconstruct the landscape of root, systemic causes for malpractice and corruption in education.

1. INTEGRITY OF EDUCATION SYSTEMS
(INTES):
A framework for assessment
Mihaylo Milovanovitch, Directorate for
Education, OECD

2. Presentation outline
The task at hand
The conceptual framework
Implementation and outcomes

3. How to go for it?
Occurrence
why?
EDUCATION
Preventative:
Preventative:
Focus on
CORRUPTION
Reactive/punitive:
Focus on origin opportunity Focus on cases
Teach & Prohibit & enforce Criminalise &
? mobilise
why? punish
Analysis and
policy reaction?
Milovanovitch

4. LIMITATIONS: The “vicious circle” –
corruption occurrence and impact
Level 3:
Corruption
occurrence
Phase I: Phase II:
Causality Measuring
Level 2: Preventive framework
links impact
Level 1:
System
shortcomings

5. How to go for it?
INTES demand-focused approach
Lets assume: good education systems
have no corruption

6. How to go for it?
INTES demand-focused approach
But:
What is a good system?
• Quality of outcomes
• Equity of access and success
• Teachers and professors
• Management
• Prevention and detection

7. Link of demand and corruption: quality
Mean reading score in PISA 2009 adjusted for country's socio-economic profile and the Global Corruption Barometer
(extent do you perceive the education system in this country to be affected by corruption)
550
Mean reading score in PISA 2009 adjusted for countries' socio-economic
Finland
Poland New Zealand
Canada Hungary France
500 OECD average Turkey United States Australia Portugal Netherlands
Ireland Germany Switzerland
Greece Italy Spain
Latvia UK Norway Denmark
Slovenia Iceland
Croatia Czech Republic Israel
Russian Federation Chile Lithuania Austria
Luxembourg
profile
Mexico
450 Thailand
Brazil Colombia
Serbia
Romania
Bulgaria
Indonesia
Peru Argentina
400
y = -32.38x + 564.3
R² = 0.217
Azerbaijan
350
4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5
Global Corruption Barometer/ Transparency International : To what extent do you perceive the the
education system in this country to be affected by corruption? (1- 5 strongest)
Source: INTES Note: Excluding South Korea and Japan

8. Link of staff policy and c.: teachers
Share of all those in top quarter of PISA reading performance who want to become teachers and the Global Corruption
Barometer (extent do you perceive the education system in this country to be affected by corruption)
2.2
Germany
Ratio Share of all that want to become teachers/those in top quarter
Austria Switzerland
France
1.7
Finland
Croatia Czech Republic
Slovenia Canada
Serbia United Kingdom Norway
Latvia Hungary Netherlands
of reading performance
Ireland
1.2 Bulgaria Denmark
Romania Australia Luxembourg
Greece Italy Iceland
Korea Azerbaijan Mexico New Zealand
Spain
Turkey
Russian Federation Thailand Poland
Argentina
Indonesia Brazil
Colombia
0.7 Israel Portugal
Lithuania
Chile
y = -0.271x + 1.918
R² = 0.120
0.2
-0.3
4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5
Global Corruption Barometer/ Transparency International : To what extent do you perceive the the
education system in this country to be affected by corruption? (1- 5 strongest)

9. How to go for it?
INTES demand-focused approach
Integrity:
The INTES assessments consider integrity in education to be the consistent application
of such actions, values, methods and principles which lead to:
•Fair access to education;
•Better quality of education;
•Fair and professional treatment of staff, and sound
management;
•Successful prevention and detection of malpractice/corruption
Origins of corruption demand:
Corruption addresses a persisting need of actors and stakeholders in education for a specific
education service, which the system is not or is not properly providing. It is caused by this
need, by an opportunity situation, or by both.
Systems in which stakeholders feel that one or more of these
“deliverables” is/are not satisfactory, have an integrity problem,
and are prone to corruption

10. How to go for it?
Origins of corruption related demand
System failing to deliver intended
outcomes (system with integrity
issues)
Demand for fairer access to
education;
Demand for better quality of
education;
Demand for fair and professional
treatment of staff, including sound
management;
Failure to ensure successful
prevention and detection

11. Education corruption –
hypothetical sequence of occurrence
Corruption Corruption
Level 3:
incidence incidence
Corruption
incidence
Level 2:
Preventive Regulatory Accountability Budget Civil society
framework framework mechanisms monitoring and media
Shortcoming 1 Shortcoming 2 Shortcoming 3 Opportunity,
spotted by
Level 1: need or greed
Education system
shortcomings Sub- Sub- Sub-
dimensions dimensions dimensions
Key area 1: Key area 2: Key area 3:
Milovanovitch teachers assessment XY

12. How to go for it?
Factors
Demand situations
addressed
Instances of corruption
Instances of corruption
Demand
creating
Demand related to equity
Instances of corruption
Good grades and exam passes obtained through bribes
addressed
Good grades and exam passes obtained through sold in advance
Exam questions bribes
demand
(access) –
Exam questions sold in advanceExam cheating countenanced or facilitated by education staff
DA
Exam cheating countenanced orRemoving the education staffof failing exams (re-admitting students under false names)
facilitated by consequences
Good grades and exam passes obtained through bribes
Removing the consequences of failing exams (re-admitting students under false names)
Exam questions sold in advance
School places (for schools perceived to be “better”) „auctioned‟ out to the highest bidder.
School places (for schools perceived to be “better”) „auctioned‟ out to the highest bidder.
Demand related to quality
?
(better quality education) – DA Private tutoring from class teacher outside schoolfacilitated byto paying pupils
Exam cheating countenanced or hours given education staff
Private tutoring from class teacher outside school hours given to paying pupils failing exams (re-admitting students under false
Removing the consequences of
Staff recruitment, promotion and postings influenced by factors not related to suitability, such as bribes or sexual favours or political
DQ names)
affiliation
Staff recruitment, promotion and postings influenced by factors not related to suitability, such as
High absenteeism (i. e. due to low motivation), affecting de facto student-teacher ratios. “better”) „auctioned‟ out to the highest
School places (for schools perceived to be
bribes or sexual favours or political affiliation
?
Demand related to staff
(prof. recognition, High
bidder.
Private tutoring, reducing teachers‟ motivation in ordinary classes
DQ absenteeism (i. e. due to low motivation), affecting de facto student-teacher ratios.
Inflated or adjusted student numbers (including Private tutoring from classpupils) quoted toschool hours given to paying pupils
numbers of special needs teacher outside obtain better funding
Private tutoring, reducing teachers‟ motivation in ordinary classes
placement, fair treatment) – material purchased due to manufacturers‟ bribes, instructors‟ copyrights, etc.
Sub-standard educational
DS Inflated or adjusted student numbers (including numbers of special needsfactors not related obtain
Staff recruitment, promotion and postings influenced by pupils) quoted to to
Embezzlement of funds intended for materials, school buildings, etc.
better funding suitability, such as bribes or sexual favours or political affiliation
Licences and authorisations for teaching obtained on false grounds via corrupt means
High absenteeism (i. e. due to low motivation), affecting de facto student-teacher
Sale/purchase of diplomas/qualifications
? DS Sub-standard educational material purchased due to manufacturers‟ bribes, instructors‟ copyrights,
etc.
ratios.
Special attention given in class to favoured pupils tied to influence or payments
Private tutoring, reducing teachers‟ motivation in ordinary classes
Private tutoring Embezzlement of funds intended for student numbers buildings, etc.
Inflated or adjusted materials, school (including numbers of special needs pupils)
Opportunity – Licences and authorisations for teachingfunding on false grounds via corrupt means
quoted to obtain better obtained
O Sale/purchase ofSub-standard educational material purchased due to manufacturers‟ bribes,
diplomas/qualifications
Special attentioninstructors‟ copyrights, etc.
given in class to favoured pupils tied to influence or payments
Private tutoring Embezzlement of funds intended for materials, school buildings, etc.
? O Licences and authorisations for teaching obtained on false grounds via corrupt means
Sale/purchase of diplomas/qualifications
Special attention given in class to favoured pupils tied to influence or payments
Private tutoring
Milovanovitch

13. Sources for country assessments
Surveys (PISA;
national and
international
corruption perception
surveys)
Data and
Stakeholder information
interviews; grid; national
media reports data and
indicators
INTES
assessment

14. Level I - System level demand analysis
Pre-university education and tertiary education
Standardised entrance
Salaries
University admission exams
Teachers
Other admission
Assessment and
Motivation
Textbooks and learning
Quality of learning Academic work criteria
examinations
environment material
Supply Understanding of
Education standards
Infrastructure Coursework
Assessment Quality assurance academic integrity
Budget formulation
Professionalism – Recruitment and
Continuous
Curriculum and Awarding of
Internal quality
appointment
Teacher Training
Pre-School Staff career credentials
Funding assessment
teaching time assurance
Execution and management
disbursement, cash Research: Ethical
Career development
Education coverage Primary and secondary
flows
Promotion exams
Classroom climate standards (interest of
Accreditation system
Funds
Parental and private
education Financial management research)
and provision
involvement
Private investments Representation and
Salaries
Research: Process
Transition to tertiary Governance: academic competencies
Governance: system LearningEducation
Tertiary outcomes Spending
(data/results)
education boards
management Vocational schools
Performance Motivation
incentives
Autonomy and
decentralisation
Milovanovitch

15. Level I Example
Process of textbook production: selection;
Textbooks and learning procurement; delivery
Quality of learning material Is the condition of school infrastructure
environment known and recorded? Is this information
Renewal of textbooks - frequency? Who
Infrastructure PISA index on disciplinary climateof school
available? What is the condition
initiates it?
infrastructure?
Abuse of process forany reported cases of
Decision authority: capital investments -
Textbooks suppliers in the past 5 years, per
curriculum and syllabuses for key subjects
Curriculum and PISA scores schools in the and reading, and for
abuse? How many and kindergartens: criteria,
building of
level and subject
past 5 years
(mathematics, literature measures foreign
teaching time what? Describe disciplinary
funding sources, initiative? geo), incl. hours
language, chemistry, physics
undertaken
Repetition and Drop-Outteachers to choose
Freedom ofschools were built in the past 5
Howassessment
Are many
schools and Rates
Classroom climate Student teacher outcomes used to make
materials? ratios - primary, secondary,
years? Where, and why there?
curricular secondary VET
decisions?
initial and
Shortage of learning materials? Comparison
with PISA diversity:maintenance classroom
Responsibilities for autonomy at of school
Classroomindex on quality of educational
Is there curriculum ESCS; within school
Learning outcomes infrastructure to what extent?
resources
variance if yes,
level and
Affordability of textbooks: Price? Renting
schemes? Complaints from parents on
PISA index ofand from teachers on supply?
affordability teacher-student relations

16. Level II – Enabling factors and
preventive framework
Corruption perception index
– Transparency International
Integrity climate
OECD SIGMA – horizontal
Anti-corruption agencies
integrity assessment
Regulatory framework
Competitiveness Index –
Legislation: criminalisation
WorldInspections
ofEconomic Forum
corruption
Accountability
mechanisms Development partner
Legislation: public sector
School boards
assessments
Off-budget funding
integrity
Budget monitoring and
evaluation National corruption
Anti-corruption strategies:
Leadership
assessments
Expenditure evaluations
national
Human resource Staffing policies
management Sector corruption
Anti-corruption strategies:
External quality assurance
assessment
State audit
sectoral
Deterrents
Public involvement
Transparency Investment and business
Anti-corruption strategies:
Internal school audits (if
Parliamentary control
climate ratings
projects
applicable)
Whistleblowers
Milovanovitch

17. Integrity analysis sample
Shortcomings
Lack of learning in
class Corruption incidence
Low salary levels Demand addressed
Private tutoring by
the same teacher
Incoherence of
transition criteria Better quality
Irregular payments
for access
Flawed textbook
production Access to education
Misuse of authority
Weak/malfunctioning Greed and
school inspections opportunity
Forced purchase of
learning materials
Lack of parental
involvement
Staff postings Demand related to
Flawed system of staff through payments staff
appointment
Milovanovitch

18. The INTES Assessment cycle
Information
Dissemination gathering and
desk research
Submission of
Site visits
draft report
Consultations and
fine tuning
Milovanovitch

19. INTES: The short-term task at hand
• Introduce a framework for assessing integrity of
education systems in view of corruption prevention.
• Provide countries which carried out an INTES
assessment with a tool for follow-up work and
tailored, sector-level recommendations on how to
address shortcomings causing corruption.

20. INTES: Outcomes and beneficiaries
Outcomes:
• Assessment report with analysis of integrity related
shortcomings and policy recommendations which is
– A tool for country level follow up
– Capacity building for specialised bodies
– A guideline for adjustment of legislative and strategic framework
and law enforcement mechanisms towards greater sector
relevance
• Beneficiaries:
– Ministries of Education
– Bodies involved in designing and implementing anti-corruption
policies and measures
– Lawmakers
– Stakeholders in education
– International partners

21. Thank you
mihaylo.milovanovitch@oecd.org
www.oecd.org/edu/nme