Generally, US high schools would be considered upper secondary educational institutions, which is ISCED level 3. However, most US high schools offer grades 9-12, whereas ISCED level 3 is grades 10-13 (see table on table on Key:grades). When tagging isced:level in such cases, is the common practice to go with the spirit of the law and tag In the former case, it seems there'd have to be a line drawn somewhere. For example, how to tag a US middle school that offers grades 5-8 or 4-7? etc. asked 24 Jun '21, 19:25  Joel Amos edited 24 Jun '21, 19:36 |
2 Answers:
Non-education person reading the docs: For the details, ISCED2011 uses a 3-digit code, with the 2 digit for general (4) vs vocational (5), and 3rd for the differences. Offering Grade 9 alone should already be 244 for sufficient level completion with direct access to ISCED 3 (there is no duration requirement). Grade 7-8 should be 242 for partial level completion (with Grade 9 being next), since it is a 2-year programme, culminating 8 years from Grade 1 (ISCED 1 start). Grade 7 alone should be 241 for insufficient for either partial and full level completion, failing to meet the 2-year duration requirement. For Grade 5 or 4-5, there's no further classification in ISCED 1, with only 100. So my guess: The standard: http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/international-standard-classification-of-education-isced-2011-en.pdf answered 24 Jun '21, 21:14  Kovoschiz edited 24 Jun '21, 21:30 |
From querying US schools with the answered 24 Jun '21, 20:16 Joel Amos edited 24 Jun '21, 21:02 Feels more like no one looked into it yet, from being the details or a lack of consensus. (24 Jun '21, 21:32) Kovoschiz |
I appreciate the effort post. I read through the docs and agree with your assessment of the above cases. The part I'm less convinced about is whether it is worthwhile to use the 3-digit codes given 1) they currently have almost no use in the database 2) it would be pretty hard to expect accurate tagging from mappers given all the subtleties in ISCED's definitions. Willing to entertain argumentation, though. Cheers!
When interpreting Michigan's school data for addition to OSM ( https://maxerickson.github.io/mischools/ ), I went with the simple definition:
0: "DevK","DevK-Part","KG","KG-Part","K-Part"
1: "1","2","3","4","5"
2: "6","7","8"
3: "9","10","11","12"
I also ended up directly listing the values in
grades, because that doesn't require any interpretation.@Joel Amos: Well yes, either you care much about it and start adding 3-digit; or you save the trouble for now and simply use
=2;3(even only=3as you have found). The only multi-digit code that seems necessary here is 010 and 020 to distinguish kindergarten and preschool. There is an official classification list for the standard programmes http://uis.unesco.org/en/isced-mappings .