Poland is one of the most interesting success stories in European education. In 2000, the results of its fifteen-year-olds’ abilities in the international OECD PISA study were below or around the OECD countries’ average, but after just a few decades, the country became one of the strongest education systems in Europe. This was one of the most remarkable leaps in the history of PISA studies, according to the “Education #1” press release.
Read more For the first time after Maduro’s removal, the US military commander visited Venezuela
What determined the success?
Poland’s success is most often linked to the 1999 education reform. Before it, students were directed quite early – around after 8th grade – into academic or vocational paths. The reform delayed this choice: all students studied longer under a common curriculum – 6 years in primary school and another 3 years in a new lower secondary school called gymnasium. Only after this stage did students choose an academic or vocational trajectory.
“Early sorting of children in education often entrenches inequality. Stronger children and stronger families cluster in some schools, weaker ones in others. Then the school does not reduce the social gap but manages it. The goal of Poland’s reform was to reduce this segregation and provide stronger education for all children. Not to lower the bar to make results look better, but to raise those who were previously written off too quickly. After the reform, weaker students stayed longer in general education, received more academic content, and more time to strengthen themselves,” says Laura Masiliauskaitė, head of the organization “Education #1”.
However, the structure was only one part of the changes. Poland also increased learning time in classrooms, especially in language and reading. This is important because text comprehension is the foundation of all other subjects: a student who does not understand the text later struggles in math and science as well.
Poland also strengthened general education in vocational schools so that the vocational path did not mean an early abandonment of academic content. The reform was supplemented by national comparative exams at different education levels. They provided the education system with data that allowed seeing which schools, municipalities, or student groups needed more help.
“Changes in the curriculum also influenced better results of Polish students. Poland moved from detailed, descriptive curricula towards a program with a clear core. Schools were given more freedom to adapt content but had to pay more attention to developing essential skills: reasoning, interpretation, and argumentation. The ability not to just repeat curriculum points but to apply acquired knowledge in various situations is especially important in today’s world,” says L. Masiliauskaitė.
Good lessons for Lithuania
Lithuania can learn several things from Poland’s success, notes L. Masiliauskaitė.
“First of all, an educational breakthrough starts with a clear goal. Poland in 1999 quite clearly knew what it wanted to change: to provide more quality general education for all, especially weaker students. Lithuania has many reforms, but their direction often disperses: sometimes curriculum, sometimes exams, sometimes school network, sometimes inclusion. For schools and other system participants, it becomes unclear what is most important and what the overall direction is,” says L. Masiliauskaitė.
The second lesson from Poland is that the foundation of students’ abilities must be raised without lowering the ceilings.
“In Lithuania recently, poor results are too often responded to by lowering the bar or adjusting assessment rules. But this does not make a student read better, argue better, or solve problems better. Therefore, weaker students need early, intensive help, while the most gifted need greater challenges,” says L. Masiliauskaitė.
The third lesson is that data must turn into actions.
“Lithuania has a lot of data: PISA results, national achievement tests, basic education achievement tests, graduation exams, school and municipality indicators. But data too rarely becomes concrete help for a school, class, or child. They often end with another report, although they should become the start of assistance,” notes L. Masiliauskaitė.
Finally, as Poland’s example shows, the curriculum must be clear and implementable.
“In Lithuania, we have been hearing for some time that the curriculum is overloaded and complicated. The good news is that, like the Poles, we have moved to competence-based content. However, teachers must also understand how to actually develop and assess those competences, and the curriculum must have enough lesson time,” says L. Masiliauskaitė.
The end of Poland’s success story?
Despite Poland’s previous success, recent years show that educational achievements are not eternal. Compared to 2018, Poland’s results in the 2022 PISA study significantly dropped in all three areas.
Read more Warsaw spoke strictly: Poland’s Defense Minister commented on Ukraine’s actions
It is worth noting that Poland still remains among the stronger European education systems – according to the sum of results in all three PISA areas, it ranks 6th in Europe and surpasses Lithuania, which is about 20th by the same methodology. However, Poland’s previous advantage has shrunk.
There is no single reason why this happened. Part of the decline, as in many other countries, is linked to the pandemic. School closures in Poland lasted longer than the OECD average, so the learning process was severely disrupted.
“However, domestic politics also received much attention. In 2017, under the Law and Justice party, the gymnasium level was abolished, and the model returned to one where after 8th grade students choose different learning trajectories. In other words, part of the structure previously associated with Poland’s success was dismantled,” says the head of “Education #1”.
The decline may also have been contributed to by an overloaded, more ideologized curriculum. During the Law and Justice government years, more emphasis related to national narrative and conservative political direction was included in the programs.
“Because of this, the new Polish government in 2024 began to correct the Law and Justice changes and aims to reduce the programs by about a fifth, arguing that after the program expansion, teachers and students were exhausted by content overload. Poland’s new government saw that when the program becomes too broad, teachers rush just to ‘cover’ topics, leaving less time for understanding, discussion, error analysis, and skill development,” says L. Masiliauskaitė.
Warning lessons for Lithuania
Poland’s decline also provides valuable lessons for Lithuania, notes L. Masiliauskaitė.
“Poland’s history shows that politically attractive decisions in education are not necessarily beneficial for children. The abolition of gymnasiums sounded attractive to many parents – fewer transitions, supposedly less adolescent chaos, a return to a familiar school structure. However, research shows that this level was one of Poland’s success pillars because it allowed keeping all students longer in the general education system. When it was abolished, Poland possibly weakened the mechanism that had helped raise weaker students’ results,” says L. Masiliauskaitė.
Another lesson from Poland is the importance of not rushing to narrow students’ learning paths too early. According to researchers, the essence of Poland’s reform was not the assumption that the vocational path is worse or meant for weaker students. The essence was different: more children studied longer under a stronger uniform general education program before choosing an academic, technical, or vocational direction.
“Poland’s example shows that the longer the system provides a strong general education foundation for all children, the more opportunities it has to raise overall student abilities. This is not a devaluation of vocational training. On the contrary – a quality vocational path must also be based on strong general education. The problem arises when a child’s trajectory is narrowed too early, before strengthening their reading, mathematical thinking, and other basic skills,” says L. Masiliauskaitė.
Finally, the Polish example shows how important quality and depoliticized curriculum content is.
“In Lithuania, we also see the risk that the curriculum becomes a collection of expectations and proposals from various groups. New topics are constantly wanted to be included in the programs, but each additional point has its cost. When content expands without a clear main axis, it becomes harder for teachers to understand what is most important, and less time remains in lessons to consistently develop essential skills – reading, argumentation, mathematical thinking, problem-solving,” says L. Masiliauskaitė.
Poland has shown that an educational leap is possible. It has also shown how quickly what was created can begin to be lost.
“For Lithuania, this should not be an invitation to copy Poland but a call to decide what we aim for: better-looking indicators or genuinely stronger learning for every child,” says L. Masiliauskaitė.
Read more Millionaire Dainius Dundulis – about rivals’ intrigues and why children do not work in his business
