IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ces/ifosdt/v65y2012i02p12-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ein Gemeinsames Kernabitur für Deutschland: Der Vorschlag des Aktionsrats Bildung

Author

Listed:
  • Ludger Wößmann

Abstract

Das Abitur hat in Deutschland eine lange Tradition als Reifeprüfung, die die Studierfähigkeit attestieren und damit den Zugang zum Hochschulsystem eröffnen soll. Allerdings werden seit Jahrzehnten beträchtliche qualitative Unterschiede hinsichtlich der Aufgabenstellungen und der Bewertungsniveaus zwischen den deutschen Bundesländern nachgewiesen. Dies verhindert eine nationale Vergleichbarkeit und erzeugt erhebliche Ungerechtigkeiten bei der Leistungsbewertung und damit beim Hochschulzugang. Darüber hinaus fehlt mit der Vergleichbarkeit ein wichtiges Instrument der Qualitätssicherung. In einem neuen Gutachten, das hier zusammengefasst wird, analysiert der Aktionsrat Bildung die Abiturprüfungsverfahren der Bundesländer und zeigt auf, dass dringender Handlungsbedarf in Richtung einer größeren nationalen Vereinheitlichung der Abiturprüfung besteht. Um dieses Ziel zu erreichen, wird ein rasch umsetzbares Konzept für ein Gemeinsames Kernabitur entwickelt, in dem konkrete Empfehlungen für die Durchführung einer länderübergreifenden Abiturkomponente in den drei Kernfächern Deutsch, Mathematik und Englisch unterbreitet werden. Diese soll ab dem Abiturjahrgang 2018 eingeführt werden und 10% der Abiturgesamtnote bzw. 30% der Abiturprüfung ausmachen. Der Vorschlag des Gemeinsamen Kernabiturs ist so angelegt, dass er sich leicht in das bestehende System der Abiturprüfungen einbinden lässt und den Ländern ein hohes Maß an Flexibilität erhält. Das Gemeinsame Kernabitur trägt dazu bei, nationale Bildungsstandards, fairen Hochschulzugang und hinreichende Studierfähigkeit zu sichern.

Suggested Citation

  • Ludger Wößmann, 2012. "Ein Gemeinsames Kernabitur für Deutschland: Der Vorschlag des Aktionsrats Bildung," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 65(02), pages 12-21, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ifosdt:v:65:y:2012:i:02:p:12-21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/ifosd_2012_2_4.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hendrik Jürges & Kerstin Schneider & Felix Büchel, 2005. "The Effect Of Central Exit Examinations On Student Achievement: Quasi-Experimental Evidence From TIMSS Germany," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 3(5), pages 1134-1155, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Martin Schlotter & Guido Schwerdt & Ludger Woessmann, 2011. "Econometric methods for causal evaluation of education policies and practices: a non-technical guide," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 109-137.
    2. Oliver Himmler & Robert Schwager, 2013. "Double Standards in Educational Standards – Do Schools with a Disadvantaged Student Body Grade More Leniently?," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 14(2), pages 166-189, May.
    3. Piopiunik, Marc & Schwerdt, Guido & Woessmann, Ludger, 2013. "Central school exit exams and labor-market outcomes," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 93-108.
    4. Miroslava Federicova, 2014. "The Impact of High-Stakes School-Admission Exams on Study Effort and Achievements: Quasi-experimental Evidence from Slovakia," Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación volume 9, in: Adela García Aracil & Isabel Neira Gómez (ed.), Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación 9, edition 1, volume 9, chapter 27, pages 515-532, Asociación de Economía de la Educación.
    5. Oliver Himmler & Robert Schwager, 2013. "Double Standards in Educational Standards – Do Schools with a Disadvantaged Student Body Grade More Leniently?," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 14(2), pages 166-189, May.
    6. Machin Stephen & Puhani Patrick A., 2005. "Special Issue on the Economics of Education – Policies and Empirical Evidence: Editorial," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 6(3), pages 259-267, August.
    7. Hille, Adrian & Schupp, Jürgen, 2015. "How Learning a Musical Instrument Affects the Development of Skills," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 44, pages 56-82.
    8. Ludger Wößmann, 2006. "Bildungspolitische Lehren aus den internationalen Schülertests: Wettbewerb, Autonomie und externe Leistungsüberprüfung," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 7(3), pages 417-444, August.
    9. Jürges Hendrik & Schneider Kerstin, 2004. "International Differences in Student Achievement: An Economic Perspective," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 5(3), pages 357-380, August.
    10. Niki, Minae, 2024. "Does the reduction in instruction time affect student achievement and motivation? Evidence from Japan," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Ludger Wößmann, 2008. "Efficiency and equity of European education and training policies," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 15(2), pages 199-230, April.
    12. Schwerdt, Guido & Woessmann, Ludger, 2017. "The information value of central school exams," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 65-79.
    13. Ludger Wößmann, 2003. "Central Exams as the "Currency" of School Systems: International Evidence on the Complementarity of School Autonomy and Central Exams," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 1(4), pages 46-56, 02.
    14. Woessmann, Ludger, 2007. "Fundamental Determinants of School Efficiency and Equity: German States as a Microcosm for OECD Countries," IZA Discussion Papers 2880, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Ludger Woessmann, 2003. "Central Exams as the "Currency" of School Systems: International Evidence on the Complementarity of School Autonomy and Central Exams," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 1(04), pages 46-56, February.
    16. Hendrik Jürges & Kerstin Schneider, 2010. "Central exit examinations increase performance... but take the fun out of mathematics," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 23(2), pages 497-517, March.
    17. Ludger Woessmann, 2016. "The Importance of School Systems: Evidence from International Differences in Student Achievement," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(3), pages 3-32, Summer.
    18. Hendrik Jürges & Wolfram F. Richter & Kerstin Schneider, 2005. "Teacher Quality and Incentives: Theoretical and Empirical Effects of Standards on Teacher Quality," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 61(3), pages 298-326, November.
    19. Pierre Salmon, 2003. "The Assignment of Powers in an Open-ended European Union," CESifo Working Paper Series 993, CESifo.
    20. Puhani, Patrick A. & Yang, Philip, 2020. "Does increased teacher accountability decrease leniency in grading?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 333-341.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bildungsabschluss; Bewertung; Weiterführende Schule; Bildungsniveau; Qualitätsmanagement; Deutschland;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ifosdt:v:65:y:2012:i:02:p:12-21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifooode.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.