AUSTRIA

1. Key indicators

2. Highlights

3. A focus on well-being in education and training

Well-being in education and training lacks a fully defined concept and political focus. National Austrian Education Reports¹ and the research community provide different approaches to and definitions of well-being. A more formal definition in 2018 brought in well-being as an aspect of societal outcomes of the education system. It is based on life satisfaction, subjective health conditions and social trust. With this broad understanding of the concept, Austria approaches ‘well-being’ indirectly through other policies.

In practice, well-being is closely linked to school psychology and education counselling. The Ministry of Education, Science and Research coordinates offices that focus predominantly on providing school psychology services in the nine regions as well as a network of organisations providing psychological support. The tasks and functioning of psycho-social support in schools is defined in a ministry circular from 2018. One of Austria’s teacher training colleges (Tyrol) covers well-being in its initial and continued teacher training. The concept Wohlfühlzone Schule (or well-being at school) follows a low-threshold approach combining school and in-class dynamics with violence prevention and reducing the drop-out rate.

Student distress during the COVID-19 pandemic triggered a number of new initiatives. The project Gönn’ Dir, which ran from March to mid-May 2021, created a web portal that aimed to reduce angst and isolation during lockdown, provide entertainment and boost student well-being. Austria also stepped up the provision of online support during the pandemic (Rat auf Draht) and home visits to reach most isolated and disengaged students.

Well-being is generally higher at lower education levels. At an earlier age, well-being policies are better established institutionally, in particular for ECEC. However, the approach to well-being also actively addresses fighting absenteeism and drop out from compulsory education. The few available surveys indicate a generally positive picture of pupil well-being at school. In the latest survey on national education standards of English in 8th grade in 2019, pupils said that they like to go to school (59%), were happy in their class (76%) and felt socially well integrated in school (56%). There is practically no difference in these findings between pupils in academic and non-academic schools. But students in academic schools had a much stronger self-awareness (+12 pps). Although only 8% of pupils in 4th grade primary school attend school unwillingly, the share nearly doubles in 8th grade (14%), similarly to the share of pupils feeling unhappy in class (4%, rising to 9%). Social integration is high at 4th grade (67%), but drops by 20 pps in 8th grade².

National surveys during the second lockdown indicated that pupils’ stress levels increased. The number of school closure days puts Austria in the mid-range of EU countries, but schools were among the least prepared for online learning (Blasko 2021). A survey (Universität Wien 2021) of over 13 000 pupils found that stress levels increased by age; older pupils also experienced a longer period of strict lockdown. About half of the pupils polled (44%) felt well or rather well during the second lockdown, against a quarter who did not (23.1%). About half of the students worked eight hours or more per day and a third worked 5-7 hours, with the workload increasing by age. Older students indicated that they had less fun in their learning twice as often at 41.1%, up from 23.3% in the first lockdown. They also felt distinctly less well in the second lockdown (28.2%/13.5%) and contacts with the people they cared about worsened (20.8%/13%). Although 98.7% of polled students had access to a computer or tablet, 26.1% did not find learning support in the family when they needed it. 80% who got support received it from their mother.

Distance learning provided a great challenge for teachers, especially in terms of supporting students from disadvantaged backgrounds. The demands on teachers and students intensified during the second phase of home schooling. 80% of teachers indicated that their workload further increased and about two thirds complained of a decline in their well-being. It was more difficult to reach out to disadvantaged pupils. During the first lockdown, teachers could not reach or hardly reach 11% of all pupils and 35.4% of disadvantaged students. This compares to 8.5% and 22.1% in the second lockdown. Overall, up to 79% of students and 87% of parents considered themselves overstrained. This had a negative impact on student performance and was particularly acute for disadvantaged students. Only a fifth managed to plan their learning well and only a third delivered completed work on time, against 61.8% and 85.6% of all students (Steiner, 2021).

The lack of well-being in Austria had a distinctly negative impact on education outcomes. According to the 2018 PISA report, Austrian pupils generally have a higher sense of belonging than the EU average, but still feel slightly lonelier. In line with the EU average, socially disadvantaged students and students with a migrant background (-0.19/-0.13) have a lower sense of belonging to school than their advantaged and Austrian-born peers (-0.2/-0.1). A strong sense of belonging is associated with a higher impact on reading performance (+31 scores) than the EU average (+18 scores), and the difference remains significant, even after accounting for socio-economic background (+18 vs EU: +11 PISA scores). Compared to the EU average, the specific situation in Austrian schools had nearly twice as strong an impact on reading performance (42, EU 28.1); the situation in the school therefore appears to be more important than the situation of the individual student (3/2.1). The difference between socio-economically strong and weak schools is one of the most pronounced in the EU.

4. Investing in education and training

General government expenditure on education in 2019 remained stable. Spending on education is close to the EU average both as a proportion of GDP (4.8% vs EU average 4.7%) and as a share of total public expenditure (9.9% vs EU average 10%). However, it rose on the previous year only by 0.8% in real terms, which was below the EU average growth rate (1.9%). Austria spends a bit more on secondary education (43%) and a bit less on pre-primary and primary education (30%) than other EU countries, but the share of higher education (15%) corresponds broadly to the EU average. Over the last 10 years, Austria’s total government expenditure on education increased by 13% in real terms, three times the EU average. Compensation for gross capital formation increased by 23%, employee wages and contributions by 18% and intermediate consumption by 9%.

Austria is beginning to invest more in early childhood education (ECEC), all day schooling, digitalisation and post-COVID education. Austria is investing EUR 235 million in the digitalisation of education under the ‘8-point plan for digital learning’, which runs from 2021 and 2024 and is partly funded by the country’s Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP). In addition, it will invest EUR 16.4 million in upgrading basic IT infrastructure. In higher education, the country will invest EUR 30 million in the research infrastructure of universities focusing on digitalisation. To compensate for the negative effect of COVID-19 on education outcomes, Austria will invest another EUR 117 million to fund 1.49 million additional learning support hours (equivalent to 1 905 additional teacher positions, also funded under the RRP). It will spend EUR 750 million to expand or improve all day schools, reserved in 2017, between 2019/2020 and 2032/2033. A pilot project for a social index in school financing will benefit 100 schools (100 Schools – 1 000 Opportunities) from 2021 to end 2023 with EUR 15 million. An agreement between the federal and regional level has earmarked EUR 142.5 million to improve early childhood education from 2019/2020 to 2021/2022. 

5. Modernising early childhood and school education

Although participation in early childhood education and care (ECEC) is increasing, participation is still comparatively low for children under the age of three. With an 89.9% participation rate of children between three years and compulsory schooling age in early childhood education in 2019, Austria was 6.1 pps below the 2030 EU-level target of 96%. The gap between the regions with the highest and the lowest participation rates narrowed from 10.6 pps in 2013 to 8.4 pps in 2019. Given that the overall rate during the last six years improved only by 3 pps and that there was practically no progress between 2018 and 2019 (+0.2), reaching the target will require continued action. While Austria’s participation rate for four year-olds is at the EU average, and above average for five year-olds, it is considerably lower for three year-olds (-11.3 pps). The share of children under the age of three attending formal childcare has risen considerably over the past 10 years (from 9% in 2009 to 22.7% in 2019.) About two thirds of children under three who attend formal childcare do so for less than 29 hours a week.

The federal government and the regions aim to boost early childhood education levels. The federal government provides³ EUR 142.5 million in earmarked grants to the regions to expand early childhood education and care capacities, the free-of-charge compulsory pre-school year and early linguistic support in 2019/20 to 2021/22. At least EUR 18 million of this funding is earmarked for linguistic support, a key objective of education policy in Austria to enable children from disadvantaged and migrant backgrounds to acquire a sound basis in German language for education. However, to achieve a good quality ECEC system, its quality and scope in Austria needs to be improved, for instance through: (1) a formal and compulsory quality framework for ECEC and (2) improved staff competences and working conditions. Most ECEC staff has qualifications below Bachelor level. The government does not intend to change this, but prefers instead to improve training opportunities for ECEC managers and opening up opportunities for people without specialised prior education in ECEC. To this end, it has developed a specific higher education programme with 60 ECTS⁴. To attract more young people to choose ECEC as a profession, it will be necessary to both invest in better working conditions and pay and to improve the image of the profession. A recent study calculates that overall, the country would need an additional 860 managers, 2450 qualified staff and 2000 less qualified staff by 2025 to increase the quantity and quality of provision (Neuwirth 2021).

The COVID-19 pandemic has made weaknesses in ECEC more apparent. The image of and working conditions for teachers need to be improved. ECEC facilities were available only to parents with system relevant jobs during three nation-wide lockdowns (spring 2020, autumn/winter 2020/21 and spring 2021). During the pandemic, 90% of ECEC staff suffered from the following stress factors⁵: (1) constantly increasing needs (90%), (2) time pressure (79%), (3) acute time pressure, inability to disconnect from work when at home and lack of recognition (64%). 80% of ECEC staff considers their pay to be too low. Unfavourable conditions in ECEC existed before COVID-19, but the pandemic shed a light on the problems and exacerbated them. Staff struggled with oversized groups, with the lack of coordination with colleagues, administrative challenges and with maintaining a reasonable work-life balance. Despite this, positive effects of the pandemic were the increased digital, coordination and communication skills as well as greater team work and flexibility. The situation made staff also more independent and self-assured. Thanks to their flexibility, they could limit children’s sense of social isolation during the pandemic. Maintaining social contact during distance learning was very important for 80% of ECEC staff, however six out of ten polled teachers stopped using digital channels when schools reopened.

Austria has reached the early school leaving target, but young people with migrant backgrounds are much more at risk of dropping out. The early school leaving rate (ELET) was 8.1% in 2020, 1.8 pps below the EU average and also below the 9% EU level target. However, the gap between native and foreign-born pupils is significant (5.7% vs 20.4%), and even larger compared with those pupils born outside the EU (24%). Although the rate of native-born people remained relative stable (+0.2) compared to 1995, the rate for foreign-born people increased significantly (+5.7). Coming from disadvantaged socio-economic and migrant backgrounds, in particular the two combined, continues to have a negative impact on education outcomes (European Commission 2020). Lack of staff and limited targeted support impacting negatively on education outcomes are often concentrated in schools with high percentages of disadvantaged students, predominantly in urban areas (OECD 2016; Oberwimmer 2019). The ‘100 schools’ project is a promising pilot project that aims to secure better resources for these schools. A wider reform of the financing mechanism would need to reach at least 519 schools (Radinger 2018) and ensure that the staff allocation and challenges are better aligned (OECD 2016).

Austria’s school age population is growing, which compounds the unmet demand for teachers. Migration contributes massively to population growth leading to a share of 24.4% inhabitants with a migrant background in 2021⁶. According the Austrian Education Report the 10-14 year-old age group is expected to grow the most (by an estimated 32 000 by 2050). Population growth is geographically uneven, affecting mainly urban regions such as Vienna (+20%)., about a third of all Austrian teachers will retire within the next 10 years⁷ and the teaching force in non-academic lower secondary school (Mittelschule) is ageing the most with 53% of teachers being over 50. This is also the school type with highest share of pupils from disadvantaged and migrant backgrounds.

Austrian teachers felt particularly uneasy using ICT for teaching before the pandemic. A study concluded that both teachers and pupils lacked sufficient experience in digital communications to handle distance learning effectively. School leaders were key enablers for digital communication and teaching, taking action for instance to promote digital communication and learning even before the start of distance learning (Steiner 2021). In the 2018 TALIS study, 18% of school leaders still identified shortages or insufficient digital equipment or internet access as being a barrier to quality education. Older teachers in particular lacked training in ICT for teaching: only 40.5% of teachers were taught during their initial teacher training how best to use ICT for teaching (-8.6 pps compared to EU), increasing to 68.3% for those trained over the last five years). Only 32.9% of teachers used ICT frequently for projects or class work (EU 46.9%). Overall, teachers’ self-perception is confident, with only 15.5% feeling they lack training. But Austrian teachers are the most insecure on ICT in the EU, with only 19.9% feeling well prepared to use ICT in teaching, the lowest share in the EU. Although Austria stepped up teacher training during the pandemic, there remains a clear need for more action.    

Austria has a series of policy initiatives that aim to address the weaknesses identified. Its 8-point plan on digitalisation aims to improve digital hardware and connectivity in schools, the digital skills of teachers, and quality digital learning content with improved access to it. A key initiative, also financed through the RRF, is to equip all pupils in fifth grade (and the sixth grade too in the first round of the initiative only) with a digital device (laptop or tablet, at the school’s choice) to create equal conditions for digital learning in school.

6. Modernising vocational education and training and adult learning

Participation in vocational education and training (VET) has remained relatively stable in recent years. The proportion of VET students out of all upper secondary education students remained stable in 2019 at 68.8% against the EU average of 48%, up slightly from 68.4% in 2018. Although 85.4% of recent graduates⁸ from VET programmes were employed in 2020, the employment rate fell by 2.6 pps compared to 2019. Thus VET graduates are employed at a higher rate than their peers from general education (69.6%).

To prevent a sharp decline in apprenticeship training places, Austria took several measures to support training companies⁹. For training contracts concluded between March 2020 and March 2021, training companies received an apprenticeship bonus of EUR 2 000 requiring as of January 2021 an investment of EUR 40 million¹⁰. Training companies were also allowed to outsource training to a newly created innovative training association. Austria amended the Vocational Training Act in March 2020, bringing in provisions for short-time work for apprentices¹¹.

Existing digital learning platforms adapted their offer to the increased demand for distance training. The ʻdigital learning platformʼ¹² for the construction sector opened up its courses to multiple educational institutions. On ʻ#Weiterlernenʼ¹³ students, teachers, trainers and parents receive support in adjusting to distance learning.

The COVID-19 pandemic had a negative impact on adult learning in Austria. According to the Conference of Adult Education Austria, 21% of courses had to be cancelled¹⁴. In 2020, only 11.7% of adults aged 25-64 indicated they had participated in adult learning over the past four weeks (14.7% in 2019), representing a detrimental reduction in participation. Among low-qualified adults, the participation rate fell from 5.7% in 2019 to 3.9% in 2020. Among unemployed adults, the participation rate was at a three-year low at 15.9% (2018: 16.3%, 2019: 19.3%)¹⁵. Overall, the adult education system is able to cope with crisis situations such as the pandemic¹⁶. However, to ensure continued participation in adult education, in particular for the low qualified, Austria should focus attention on the training offer, the relevance of it to meet the specific target as well as context factors.

7. Modernising higher education

Austria needs more tertiary graduates to become an innovation leader. Austrian tertiary education attainment increased over the last 10 years by 20.5 pps to 41.4% in 2020¹⁷. Despite lack of further improvement in the last year, attainment levels remained above the EU-27 average of 40.5%. In 2019, Austria had a high share of STEM graduates at 31%, above comparable countries such as Sweden (27%), Finland (29%) and Estonia (28%). Between 2014 and 2019 the share of enrolled students in ISCED levels 5-8 did not change, but there was a 5% fall at short-cycle and master level and a 10% rise at bachelor level. Participation in doctoral studies contracted sharply (-21 pps). Austria needs more tertiary graduates, especially in STEAM subjects,¹⁸ to become an innovation leader.

The rate of higher education attainment of people born outside Austria has increased. Between 2010 and 2020, the tertiary attainment rate of foreign-born people doubled (from 20.0 to 39.7), for non-EU born people it increased by 17.1 pps to 31.6 and for EU-born people it increased by 20.5 pps to 49.2. Attainment rates in rural areas more than doubled to 34.9, and with the rate higher in cities (27.4-50.8), a gap of 15.9 pps remains in 2020.

A recent higher education reform clarifies the framework conditions, improves flexibility and issues of recognition. After lengthy and thorough preparations, Austria amended the University law in May 2021. The main changes are: (1) the requirement to complete a minimum of 16 ECTS within two years to remain registered as a student, (2) more autonomy for universities to react to unforeseen circumstances such as the recent pandemic, (3) easier recognition of international school diplomas and accrediting extracurricular, professional or non-professional achievements and (4) a clearer definition of the beginning and the end of semesters.

Reforming continuous education in higher education contributes to reskilling and upskilling adults to support the digital and green transition. The reform package on continuous education in higher education¹⁹, entering into force on 1 October 2021, provides a reform of continuing education at higher education institutions, standardised legal framework conditions, introduces a range of bachelor’s and master’s degrees for continued education and their specifications, specifies that these degree courses can only be offered in cooperation with non-university partners, and enables transfers to other courses and comparison at international level.

Distance learning during the pandemic did not have a major negative impact on learning outcomes but students prefer face-to-face teaching. Three quarters of students²⁰ did not have problems with online exams nor lacked information when learning at home. Only 5% reported negative experiences. About a quarter of the polled students during the second lockdown indicated a worsening of their well-being. Students were generally able to maintain contacts with people they cared about (32% equal, 22.3% improved, 15.5% worse). A quarter of students believed that they learned less or less efficiently. Distance learning improved their independent communication skills and learning, time management and self-organisation, all competences conducive to successful studies. Nevertheless, most students wish to return to face-to-face learning (47.1% positive, 25.5% neutral and 27.4% negative).

8. References

Blasko, Z., da Costa, P. and Schnepf, S. (2021) Learning Losses and Educational Inequalities in Europe: Mapping the Potential Consequences of the Covid-19 Crisis. IZA Institute of Labour Economics; Discussion Series No. 14298 Learning Loss and Educational Inequalities in Europe: Mapping the Potential Consequences of the COVID-19 Crisis (iza.org).

Bundesgesetzblatt I Nr. 18/2020. Änderung des Berufsbildungsgetzes. https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/BgblAuth/BGBLA_2020_I_18/BGBLA_2020_I_18.pdfsig.

Cedefop ReferNet (2020), Austria: vocational education and training during the corona crisis.  https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/news-and-press/news/austria-vocational-education-and-training-during-corona-crisis#2.

Council of the European Union. Recommendation for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on the 2020 National Reform Programme of Austria and delivering a Council opinion on the 2020 Convergence Programme of Austria. https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8439-2020-INIT/en/pdf.

Federal Chancellery (2021), National Reform Programme 2021.  https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/2021-european-semester-national-reform-programme-austria_en.pdf.

European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2021. Teachers in Europe: Careers, Development and Well-being. Eurydice report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/teachers-europe-carreers-development-and-well-being_en.

European Commission. Education and Training Monitor Austria 2020. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/b6837464-2494-11eb-9d7e-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format-PDF/source-171314305.

Federal Ministry for women, family, youth and integration (2021). Integrationsbericht 2021.

Neuwirth, N. (2021), Kostenschätzung zum Ausbau im Elementarbildungsbereich, ÖIF Forschungsbericht 42|2021. https://www.oif.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/p_oif/Forschungsberichte/FB_42_-_Kostenschaetzung_Ausbau_Elementarpaedagogik.pdf

Oberwimmer, K., Vogtenhuber, S., Lassnigg, L. and Schreiner, C. (Eds.) (2019), Nationaler BildungsberichtÖsterreich 2018, Band 1, Graz: Leykam. https://irihs.ihs.ac.at/id/eprint/4959/1/NBB-2018.pdf.

OECD (2016), OECD Reviews of School Resources: Austria 2016, Paris: OECD Publishing.https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3110/6be4b0938fda487aa035467ceb2c5ca1f180.

OECD (2019 Vol III), PISA 2018 Results (Volume III): What School Life Means for Students’ Lives, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/acd78851-en.

(OECD (2021), Positive, High-achieving Students?: What Schools and Teachers Can Do, TALIS, OECD Publishing, https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/positive-high-achieving-students_3b9551db-en.

Radinger, R., Ernst, D. and Mayerweck, E. (2018), Sonderauswertung Analyse zum Chancenindex. Arbeiterkammer Wien.  https://wien.arbeiterkammer.at/service/studien/Bildung/Chancenindex_2018.pdf.

Steiner, M., Köpping, M., Leitner, A., Pessl, G. and Lorenz,L. (2021) Lehren und Lernen unter Pandemiebedingungen - Was tun, damit aus der Gesundheits- nicht auch eine Bildungskrise wird? Institute of Advanced Studies. Research Report. https://irihs.ihs.ac.at/id/eprint/5873/.

Statistics Austria. https://wien.arbeiterkammer.at/service/studien/Bildung/Chancenindex_2018.pdf.

IEA's Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (2020) - TIMSS 2019. https://www.iea.nl/sites/default/files/2021-01/TIMSS%202019-International-Results-in-Mathematics-and-Science.pdf.

Universität Wien (2021). Lernen unter COVID-19 Bedingungen: Wie erging es den Schüler*innen im zweiten Lockdown? https://lernencovid19.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/p_lernencovid19/Zwischenbericht_Befragung_4_final.pdf

Annex I: Key indicators sources

Indicator	Eurostat online data code
Participation in early childhood education	educ_uoe_enra21
Low achieving eighth-graders in digital skills	IEA, ICILS.
Low achieving 15-year-olds in reading, maths and science	OECD (PISA)
Early leavers from education and training	Main data: edat_lfse_14 . Data by country of birth: edat_lfse_02 .
Exposure of VET graduates to work based learning	Data for the EU-level target is not available. Data collection starts in 2021. Source: EU LFS.
Tertiary educational attainment	Main data: edat_lfse_03 . Data by country of birth: edat_lfse_9912 .
Participation of adults in learning	Data for the EU-level target is not available collection starts in 2022. Source: EU LFS.
Public expenditure on education as a percentage of GDP	gov_10a_exp
Expenditure on public and private institutions per student	educ_uoe_fini04
Upper secondary level attainment	edat_lfse_03

Annex II: Structure of the education system