D 2.1 Policy Analysis Report: Chapter 2 Methodology

2. Methodology

2.1 Introduction

This chapter outlines the methodological approach adopted in the report. It presents the scope of the analysis, the criteria for selecting countries and policies, and the procedures used to collect and interpret data. The study examines educational reforms and policy initiatives implemented in 29 European countries between 1999 and 2024. This timeframe was chosen to capture both long-term systemic changes and more recent developments in education policy. By covering a 25-year period, the analysis identifies trends in policy design, shifts in priorities, and the evolving challenges faced by education systems. The following sections detail the research design, data sources, and analytical framework applied in the study.

The main objective of the comparative methodological approach used was to ensure a comprehensive examination of policies that directly or indirectly influence educational inequalities. To achieve this, we have identified and analysed legislative measures, national and regional programmes, and institutional strategies that aim to improve access to education, support vulnerable student groups, and enhance overall educational quality. Our analysis encompasses reforms at different educational levels, following the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED)¹:

Back to Table of Contents

• ISCED 0 – Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC)
• ISCED 1 & 2 – Primary and Lower Secondary Education
• ISCED 3 – Upper Secondary Education (General and Vocational)
• ISCED 4+ – Higher Education

A crucial aspect of this comparative international research study was the identification of key policy trends across Europe, highlighting the most common and innovative approaches to reducing educational inequalities. Many countries have introduced targeted interventions for disadvantaged groups, such as Roma students, migrant children, and students with special educational needs. Others have implemented structural changes, such as extending compulsory education, increasing investment in early childhood education, or reforming vocational training to enhance social mobility.

This methodological framework was designed to provide a clear and reliable foundation for assessing the effectiveness of different educational policies. While some reforms have been systematically evaluated, in many cases, assessment data is limited or unavailable. Nevertheless, the analysis presented in this report provides a comparative overview of the measures taken in different national contexts, identifying both best practices and areas where further research and policy action are needed.

Back to Table of Contents

2.2 Data sources and selection of policies and reforms

To conduct a comprehensive analysis of educational reforms aimed at reducing inequalities, this study relies on a diverse set of data sources. These sources were carefully selected to ensure accuracy, reliability, and a broad representation of national and international perspectives on education policies. The main categories of data sources included:

• Eurydice and Youth Wiki² – European networks providing detailed descriptions and comparative analyses of education systems and reforms in European countries. They served as a key reference for understanding national education structures and policies.
• OECD’s publications³ – reports were utilised to gather insights into policy changes, their objectives, and, where available, their impact.
• European Commission Reports – these publications provided updates on policy trends, educational outcomes, and equity-related challenges across EU member states.
• Official government websites – national ministries of education and other regulatory bodies provided legislative documents, policy frameworks, and progress reports on educational reforms to ensure country-specific perspectives.
• Strategic education plans and reports – long-term national strategies were used to contextualise policy decisions.
• Peer-reviewed journal articles – research published in educational policy and social science journals provided empirical evaluations of reforms and their effectiveness.
• Google Scholar and research databases – additional literature was identified using keyword searches related to education reforms, inequalities, and inclusion.

Back to Table of Contents

By integrating data from these diverse sources, this approach allowed for an assessment of both policy intentions and their practical implementation, highlighting best practices as well as areas where further action is needed to address educational inequalities.

The selection of educational policies for this study was guided by specific criteria to ensure relevance to the topic of educational inequalities. Policies were included if they met one or more of the following conditions:

• Direct impact on educational equity – policies explicitly designed to reduce inequalities, such as targeted programmes for disadvantaged students, special needs education reforms or measures addressing regional disparities;
• Structural changes in education systems – reforms that affect the overall accessibility and quality of education, such as extending compulsory schooling or increasing funding for early childhood education;
• Interventions targeting specific groups – policies aimed at supporting vulnerable student populations, including Roma students, migrant children, students from low-income families, and children with disabilities;
• Additional criterion: availability of evaluation data – preference was given to policies for which some form of impact assessment or evaluation was available, though the lack of systematic evaluations remains a challenge in some cases.

Back to Table of Contents

2.2.1 Scope of analysis

In the STRIDE research study, we have examined educational reforms aimed at reducing inequalities across 29 European countries, covering a broad spectrum of reforms from a 25-year period (policies started between 1999 and 2024). The analysis focused on identifying key measures introduced at different levels of education, assessing their objectives, implementation strategies, and, where possible, their impact on reducing disparities in educational access and outcomes. While the number and nature of analysed reforms vary by country, efforts were made to ensure representation of policies across all ISCED levels. Additionally, the research considered policy evaluation and monitoring.

Back to Table of Contents

2.3 Limitations

While the research on which we report aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis of educational reforms addressing inequalities across most of European countries, several limitations must be acknowledged. The main challenge was language, as data collection was carried out by researchers from six European countries (Denmark, Greece, England, Hungary, Norway, Poland) thus our expertise in the number of languages in Europe was limited (Danish, Greek, German, English, Hungarian, Norwegian, Polish). This limitation was mitigated using international databases and articles in English. However, based on experience with those countries with which the researchers had a thoroughgoing familiarity, it has not always been possible to gather all relevant information through the chosen means. In some cases, language barriers may have limited the completeness and accuracy of the identification of national reforms, as relevant information may not have been fully accessible through English-language sources. Databases might both be incomplete and out of date with the latest reforms and the quality of description of the reforms throughout the various databases and entries to different databases might vary significantly as there is no uniform requirement of entries. The availability and quality of data on educational reforms vary significantly across countries. While some nations maintain detailed databases and regularly publish policy reports, others provide limited public access to such information.

Back to Table of Contents

Another challenge concerns the description of the reforms in the databases. The aim of the STRIDE project is to analyse the most important educational reforms in Europe over the last 25 years that address inequality. As such, we have only analysed reforms that clearly address this issue in the description of the reform in the database. However, we cannot be sure that all of the reforms in the databases have adequate descriptions in relation to our aim. It is therefore possible that some relevant reforms have not been identified because the databases may describe them in general terms, making it difficult to identify how, and if, the reform address inequality.

An additional limitation of the analyses is that some reforms might have objectives other than directly addressing inequality, yet tackling this issue might still be a secondary, albeit less prominent, goal of the reform. However, this does not preclude that a reform not primarily aimed at addressing inequality can have significant impact on inequalities in education and learning outcomes and promote or hinder equity and inclusion. This is notably the case with universal policies, such as a national education policy for providing quality school lunches to all children in compulsory education (Alderman, 2024). In these instances, relevant terms might be missing from the consulted databases, making it difficult to identify these reforms. However, by using expert judgment and contextual analysis, it is possible to recognise reforms whose mechanisms or expected outcomes are likely to affect educational inequalities, even if this is not explicitly mentioned.

Back to Table of Contents

Another challenge concerns the definition of reform. In this study, we adopt the classifications used by Eurydice and Youth Wiki; if an action is designated as a reform in these sources, we retain that designation without further contestation. It should be noted, however, that certain policy measures aimed at reducing educational inequality – such as government surveys or smaller-scale initiatives – may not be categorised as reforms in these databases or in a broader policy context, even though they may exert a substantial influence on educational equity.

Significantly, only educational reforms have been analysed in this report. Some actions related to equalising educational opportunities are embedded in initiatives related to health (health policies, for example, those concerning people with disabilities), policies for national and ethnic minorities, or those related to social welfare. Education systems in Europe differ widely in terms of structure, governance, and policy priorities. These differences complicate direct comparisons between reforms, as policies may be implemented and interpreted differently depending on national and regional contexts. Education policies are often subject to political changes, leading to reforms being introduced, modified, or even reversed within a short period. Yet some of the most important measures towards mitigating educational and social inequality are not part of educational legislation but are rather instituted with, for instance, housing or other social policies. Some of these policies might implicitly or explicitly introduce measures that are meant to be effectuated within the educational systems, but due to constraints in time and resources, these other reforms were not included in this analysis.

Back to Table of Contents

Finally, we note that there is an inconsistent availability of impact evaluations for many of the reforms analysed. While some countries conduct regular assessments of their education policies, others lack systematic evaluation frameworks, making it difficult to measure the effectiveness of specific initiatives. This limitation affects the ability to draw definitive conclusions about the long-term impact of certain policies.

1. ISCED is the reference international classification for organising education programmes and related
   qualifications by levels and fields. ISCED 2011 (levels of education) has been implemented in all EU data
   collections since 2014. ISCED-F 2013 (fields of education and training) has been implemented since
   2016.
   https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/index.php?title=International_Standard_Classification_of_Education_(ISCED) ↩︎
2. Youth Wiki is an online encyclopedia providing insights into youth policies across 34 European
   countries. It fosters evidence-based cooperation and peer-learning in the youth sector, supporting the
   European Commission and national decision-making. Information is sourced and updated by National
   Correspondents designated by each country’s responsible authority, usually the ministry overseeing youth
   policies. (https://national-policies.eacea.ec.europa.eu/youthwiki)
   Eurydice is a network of 43 European National Units providing data and analyses on European education
   systems. It publishes descriptions of national education systems, comparative studies on key topics, and
   data and visuals on a range of education issues. Eurydice supports policy-making in education. National
   Units are appointed by the responsible public authority of each country, usually the ministry in charge of
   education policies. (https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu//eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/ ). ↩︎
3. The OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) is an international organisation
   serving as a forum and knowledge hub for data, analysis and best practices in public policy, working with
   over 100 countries across the world. (https://www.oecd.org/en/about.html ) ↩︎

Back to Table of Contents