PISA 2009 Evaluating systems to improve education

  • 1,549 views
Uploaded on

The 2009 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) results were released by the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) on December 7 in Paris, France. During a live …

The 2009 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) results were released by the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) on December 7 in Paris, France. During a live webcast on December 7, Andreas Schleicher of the OECD presented the results of the study including performance results and an analysis of the common elements of high-performing education systems.

More in: Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,549
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
28
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Programme for International Student Assessment 1 1What students know and can do PISA 2009 Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 Evaluating systems to improve education The yardstick for success is no longer improvement by nationalPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for standards alone but the best performing education systems Andreas Schleicher Special advisor to the Secretary-General on Education Policy Head of the Indicators and Analysis Division, EDU
  • 2. 2 2 PISA 2009 in brief PISA countries in 2001 2003 2000 2009 2006 1998What students know and can do  Over half a million of world economy 83% Coverage students… 87% 86% 85% 81% 77%  representing 28 million 15-year-olds in 74* countries/economies … took an internationally agreed 2-hour test… Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010  Goes beyond testing whether students can reproduce what they were taught… … to assess students’ capacity to extrapolate from what they know and creatively apply their knowledge in novel situationsPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for … and responded to questions on…  their personal background, their schools and their engagement with learning and school  Parents, principals and system leaders provided data on…  school policies, practices, resources and institutional factors that help explain performance differences . * Data for Costa Rica, Georgia, India, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Venezuela and Vietnam will be published in December 2011
  • 3. 3 3 PISA 2009 in brief PISA countries in 2001 2003 2000 2009 2006 1998What students know and can do  PISA seeks to… of world economy 83% Coverage 87% 86% 85% 81% 77% … Support governments to prepare students… … to deal with more rapid change than ever before… Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 … for jobs that have not yet been created… … using technologies that have not yet been invented… … to solve problems that we don’t yet know will arise … Provide a basis for policy dialogue and globalPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for collaboration in defining and implementing educational goals, policies and practices – Show countries what achievements are possible – Help governments set policy targets in terms of measurable goals achieved elsewhere – Gauge the pace of educational progress – Facilitate peer-learning on policy and practice .
  • 4. 5 5 How the demand for skills has changedWhat students know and can do Economy-wide measures of routine and non-routine task input (US) Mean task input as percentiles of the 1960 task distribution 65 Routine manual Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 60 Nonroutine manual 55 Routine cognitivePISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for 50 Nonroutine analytic 45 Nonroutine interactive 40 1960 1970 1980 The dilemma of 2002 1990 schools: The skills that are easiest to teach and test are also the ones that are easiest to (Levy and Murnane) digitise, automate and outsource
  • 5. PISA What students know and can do OECD Programme for Andreas SchleicherInternational Student Assessment 7 December 2010 11 11 What 15-year-olds can do
  • 6. Shanghai-China High reading performance 17 17 Average performance of 15-year-olds inWhat students know and can do Korea 540.000 Finland reading – extrapolate Hong Kong-China and apply Singapore Canada New Zealand 520.000 Japan Australia Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 Belgium Netherlands Northeast Poland, Switzerland Norway , Estonia Midwest United States Iceland 500.000 Germany, Sweden Liechtenstein France, Ireland Chinese Taipei Hungary, United Kingdom Denmark Portugal Macao-China Italy West LatviaPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for Slovenia Greece South Spain 480.000 Slovak Republic, Czech Republic Croatia Luxembourg, Israel Austria Lithuania Turkey 460.000 Dubai (UAE) Russian Federation Chile Serbia 440.000 55 45 35 25 … 17 countries perform below this line Low reading performance
  • 7. High reading performance 28 28 Average performance Highof 15-year-olds inWhat students know and can do High average performance average performance Large socio-economic disparities science – extrapolate High social equity and apply Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 Strong socio- Socially equitable economic impact on distribution of learning student performance opportunitiesPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for Low average performance Low average performance Large socio-economic disparities High social equity Low reading performance
  • 8. Australia High reading performance 29 29 Belgium 2009 2009 Canada DurchschnittlicheWhat students know and can do High average performance High average performance Chile Czech Rep Large socio-economic disparities Schülerleistungen im High social equity Denmark Bereich Mathematik Finland Germany Greece Hungary Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 Iceland Ireland Israel Strong socio- Socially equitable Italy economic impact on distribution of learning Japan student performance opportunities KoreaPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Spain Low average performance Low average performance Sweden SwitzerlandLarge socio-economic disparities High social equity UK 55 45 35 25 1 US Low reading performance
  • 9. Australia High reading performance 30 30 Belgium 2009 Canada DurchschnittlicheWhat students know and can do High average performance High average performance Chile Czech Rep Large socio-economic disparities Schülerleistungen im High social equity Denmark Bereich Mathematik Finland Germany Greece Hungary Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 Iceland Ireland Israel Strong socio- Socially equitable Italy economic impact on distribution of learning Japan student performance opportunities KoreaPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Spain Low average performance Low average performance Sweden SwitzerlandLarge socio-economic disparities High social equity UK US Low reading performance
  • 10. Australia High reading performance 31 31 Belgium 2000 Canada DurchschnittlicheWhat students know and can do High average performance High average performance Chile Czech Rep Large socio-economic disparities Schülerleistungen im High social equity Denmark Bereich Mathematik Finland Germany Greece Hungary Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 Iceland Ireland Israel Strong socio- Socially equitable Italy economic impact on distribution of learning Japan student performance opportunities KoreaPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Spain Low average performance Low average performance Sweden SwitzerlandLarge socio-economic disparities High social equity UK US Low reading performance
  • 11. Australia High reading performance 32 32 Belgium 2000 Canada DurchschnittlicheWhat students know and can do High average performance High average performance Chile Czech Rep Large socio-economic disparities Schülerleistungen im High social equity Denmark Bereich Mathematik Finland Germany Greece Hungary Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 Iceland Ireland Israel Strong socio- Socially equitable Italy economic impact on distribution of learning Japan student performance opportunities KoreaPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Spain Low average performance Low average performance Sweden SwitzerlandLarge socio-economic disparities High social equity UK US Low reading performance
  • 12. PISA What students know and can do OECD Programme for Andreas SchleicherInternational Student Assessment 7 December 2010 55 55 Quality differences between schools
  • 13. What students know and can do PISA Variance OECD Programme for Andreas Schleicher 58 100 100 80 60 20 20 40 60 80 40 0 International Student Assessment 7 December 2010 58 ArgentinaTrinidad and Tobago Italy Qatar Turkey Bulgaria Israel Panama Germany Peru Hungary between schools Dubai (UAE) Austria Belgium Luxembourg students within schools Netherlands Japan Performance differences Performance variation of Chile Uruguay Greece Brazil Czech Republic Slovenia Romania Croatia Serbia United States Mexico Singapore Jordan Kyrgyzstan Colombia Montenegro Hong Kong-China Albania Tunisia Slovak Republic Liechtenstein Kazakhstan Macao-China Ireland United Kingdom Chinese Taipei Korea Switzerland Australia New Zealand Portugal Shanghai-China Azerbaijan Russian Federation between and within schools Canada Sweden Lithuania Indonesia Spain Poland Variability in student performance Estonia Latvia Iceland Thailand Denmark Norway Finland
  • 14. PISA What students know and can do OECD Programme for Andreas SchleicherInternational Student Assessment 7 December 2010 59 59 more inequitable education system ? Does a more unequal society necessarily imply a
  • 15. 60 60 0 Percentage of explained variance in student performance Low income equality Macao-China High income equalityWhat students know and can do High educational equity High educational equity Qatar 5 Hong Kong-China Iceland Indonesia Estonia Azerbaijan Japan Finland Tunisia Jordan Norway Trinidad and Tobago Montenegro Canada Serbia 10 Andreas Schleicher Latvia Korea Albania 7 December 2010 Russian Federation Italy Kazakhstan Croatia Slovak Republic Brazil Thailand Israel Ireland Greece Czech Republic Lithuania Australia Netherlands OECD average United Kingdom Romania Sweden Spain 15 Poland Switzerland Mexico Singapore Kyrgyzstan Slovenia Denmark Colombia Portugal France Austria United States New Zealand LuxembourgPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for Panama Chile Turkey Germany 20 Argentina Bulgaria Belgium Uruguay OECD average Low income equality High income equality 25 Low educational equity Low educational equity Hungary Peru 30 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 Income inequality (Gini-coefficient)
  • 16. PISA What students know and can do OECD Programme for Andreas SchleicherInternational Student Assessment 7 December 2010 61 61 How do social background and learning outcomes interact?
  • 17. 73 School performance and socio-economic background 73 United StatesWhat students know and can do Private school Public school in rural area Public school in urban area School performance and schools’ socio-economic background Student performance and students’ socio-economic background within schools 700 643 Thousands Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 Student performancePISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for 350 -2 -1 0 1 2 Disadvantage PISA Index of socio-economic background Advantage
  • 18. PISA What students know and can do OECD Programme for Andreas Schleicher % 0 10 30 40 50 60 70 80 20 International Student Assessment 7 December 2010 80 80 Shanghai-China Hong Kong-China Korea Macao-China Singapore Finland Japan Turkey Canada Portugal Chinese Taipei Poland New Zealand Spain students among Liechtenstein Estonia Netherlands disadvantaged students More than 30% resilient Italy Switzerland Latvia Australia OECD average France Belgium Ireland Iceland Mexico United States Greece Thailand Croatia Tunisia Norway Hungary social background) Sweden Slovenia Indonesia Denmark Chile United Kingdom students among Israel Colombia Resilient student: Comes from the bottom quarter of the socially most disadvantaged Germany students internationally (after accounting for disadvantaged students Brazil students but performs among the top quarter of Czech Republic Slovak Republic Between 15%-30% of resilient Luxembourg Lithuania disadvantaged students Austria Russian FederationTrinidad and Tobago Uruguay Serbia Jordan Albania Argentina Dubai (UAE) Romania Percentage of resilient students among Bulgaria Panama Montenegro Kazakhstan Peru students among Azerbaijan Less than 15% resilient Qatar disadvantaged students Kyrgyzstan
  • 19. PISA What students know and can do OECD Programme for Andreas SchleicherInternational Student Assessment 7 December 2010 95 95 Does it all matter?
  • 20. 96 Increased likelihood of postsec. particip. at age 19/21 96 associated with PISA reading proficiency at age 15 (Canada)What students know and can do after accounting for school engagement, gender, mother tongue, place of residence, parental, education and family income (reference group PISA Level 1) Odds ratio higher Andreas Schleicher education 20 7 December 2010 entry 18 16 14 12 10PISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for 8 6 4 2 0 Age 19 Age 21 Level 5 Age 21 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2
  • 21. PISA What students know and can do OECD Programme for Andreas Schleicher 2International Student Assessment 7 December 2010 102 10 What does it all mean?
  • 22. PISA What students know and can do OECD Programme for Andreas Schleicher 3International Student Assessment 7 December 2010 103 10 systems Some lessons from successful
  • 23. 10 105  A commitment to education and the belief that competencies can be learned andWhat students know and can do 5 therefore all children can achieve  Universal educational standards and personalisation as the approach to heterogeneity in the student body… Andreas Schleicher … as opposed to a belief that students have 7 December 2010 different destinations to be met with different Lessons from PISA expectations, and selection/stratification as on successful the approach to heterogeneity Clear articulation who is responsible for education systems PISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for ensuring student success and to whom
  • 24. High reading performance 10 107 2009 DurchschnittlicheWhat students know and can do High average performance High average performance 7 Schülerleistungen im Large socio-economic disparities High social equity Bereich Mathematik Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 Strong socio- Socially equitable economic impact on distribution of learning student performance opportunitiesPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for Early selection and Low average performance Low average performance institutional differentiation Large socio-economic disparities High social equity High degree of stratification Low degree of stratification Low reading performance
  • 25. 10 108  Clear ambitious goals that are shared acrossWhat students know and can do 8 the system and aligned with high stakes gateways and instructional systems  Well established delivery chain through which curricular goals translate into instructional systems, instructional practices and student Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 learning (intended, implemented and achieved) Lessons of metacognitive content of  High level from PISA instruction on successful education systemsPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for
  • 26. 10 109 School autonomy, standardised exams and student performanceWhat students know and can do 9 PISA score in reading 500 Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 490PISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for School autonomy in resource allocation Schools with more autonomy 480 483 Schools with less autonomy Systems with standards-based Systems without exams standards-based exams System’s accountability arrangements
  • 27. 11 110What students know and can do 0  Capacity at the point of delivery Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010  Attracting, developing and retaining high quality Lessons from PISAand a work teachers and school leaders organisation in which they can use their on successful potential education systemsPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for  Instructional leadership and human resource management in schools  Keeping teaching an attractive profession  System-wide career development
  • 28. 11 111What students know and can do 1  Incentives, accountability, knowledge management  Aligned incentive structures For students  How gateways affect the strength, direction, clarity and nature of the incentives operating on students at each stage of their education Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010  Degree to which students have incentives to take tough courses and study hard  Lessons from PISA Opportunity costs for staying in school and performing well For teacherson successful Make innovations in pedagogy and/or organisation Improveeducation systemsPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for   their own performance and the performance of their colleagues  Pursue professional development opportunities that lead to stronger pedagogical practices  A balance between vertical and lateral accountability  Effective instruments to manage and share knowledge and spread innovation – communication within the system and with stakeholders around it  A capable centre with authority and legitimacy to act
  • 29. School autonomy, accountability 11 116 and student performanceWhat students know and can do Impact of school autonomy on performance in systems with and without 6 PISA score in reading accountability arrangements 500 Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 495 490PISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for School autonomy in resource allocation Schools with more autonomy 480 Schools with less autonomy Systems with more accountability Systems with less accountability System’s accountability arrangements
  • 30. 12 121What students know and can do Public and private schools Government schools Observed performance difference Government dependent private 1 Government independent private Difference after accounting for socio-economic background of students and schools 0 20 40 60 80 -150 100 -100 -50 0 50 100 % Australia Austria Score point difference Canada Chile Czech Republic Andreas Schleicher Denmark 7 December 2010 Estonia Finland Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Private schools Korea perform betterPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Public schools Poland perform better Portugal Slovak Republic Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey United Kingdom United States Argentina Brazil Hong Kong-China Indonesia Jordan Russian Federation Shanghai-China Singapore Chinese Taipei
  • 31. 12 123What students know and can do 3 Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 Lessons from PISA on successful education systemsPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for  Investing resources where they can make most of a difference  Alignment of resources with key challenges (e.g. attracting the most talented teachers to the most challenging classrooms)  Effective spending choices that prioritise high quality teachers over smaller classes
  • 32. 12 124What students know and can do 4 Andreas Schleicher A learning system 7 December 2010   Lessons from PISA An outward orientation of the system to keep the system learning, international benchmarks as the ‘eyes’ and ‘ears’ onthe system of successful education systems Recognising challenges and potential futurePISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for  threats to current success, learning from them, designing responses and implementing these
  • 33. 12 Coherence of policies and practices 125 What students know and can do 5 Alignmentaspects of the system across all of policies   Coherence of policies over sustained periods of time Consistency of implementation Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010   Fidelity of implementation (without excessive control) from Lessons PISA on successful education systemsPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for
  • 34. 12 126 Education reform trajectoriesWhat students know and can do 6 The old bureaucratic system The modern enabling system Student inclusion Some students learn at high levels All students need to learn at high levels Andreas Schleicher Curriculum, instruction and assessment 7 December 2010 Routine cognitive skills, rote learning Learning to learn, complex ways of thinking, ways of working Teacher qualityPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for Few years more than secondary High-level professional knowledge workers Work organisation ‘Tayloristic’, hierarchical Flat, collegial Accountability Primarily to authorities Primarily to peers and stakeholders
  • 35. PISA What students know and can do OECD Programme for Andreas Schleicher 7International Student Assessment 7 December 2010 127 12 Beyond schooling
  • 36. Score pointWhat students know and can do PISA difference OECD Programme for Andreas Schleicher 8 0 20 40 60 80 100 International Student Assessment 7 December 2010 128 120 12 Israel Singapore Belgium Qatar Macao-China Italy France Hong Kong-China Switzerland Denmark United Kingdom Liechtenstein Dubai (UAE) Greece Kyrgyzstan Uruguay Argentina Shanghai-China Germany Spain New Zealand Australia Slovak Republic Sweden Brazil Hungary Performance advantage after Luxembourg Observed performance advantage Mexico ThailandTrinidad and Tobago Canada accounting for socio-economic factors OECD average Chinese Taipei Indonesia Poland Iceland Kazakhstan Panama Romania Czech Republic Japan Tunisia Peru Austria Jordan Bulgaria Norway Albania Azerbaijan Russian Federation Colombia Portugal Chile United States Lithuania Turkey Serbia Montenegro Netherlands Ireland primary school for more than one year and those who did not Slovenia Croatia Performance difference between students who had attended pre- Finland Korea Latvia Estonia
  • 37. PISA What students know and can do OECD Programme for Andreas Schleicher 9 International Student Assessment 7 December 2010 129 12 Score point difference 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 Lithuaniaong Kong-China Macao-China Croatia Portugal Italy Panama Chile “read books" Korea Parental support Denmark Hungary (weekly or daily) and those who do not: Qatar at the beginning of primary school Germany New Zealand Score point difference between students whose parents often do
  • 38. PISA What students know and can do OECD Programme for Andreas Schleicher 0 International Student Assessment 7 December 2010 130 Score point difference 10 30 40 50 60 20 -10 0 Lithuania Germany Denmark CroatiaHong Kong-China Korea Macao-China Portugal Hungary primary school New Zealand Chile (weekly or daily) and those who do not: "talk about what they had done" Italy Panama 13 Parental support at the beginning of Qatar Score point difference between students whose parents often do
  • 39. PISA What students know and can do OECD Programme for Andreas Schleicher 1 International Student Assessment 7 December 2010 131 13 Score point difference 15 20 25 30 35 10 0 5 Lithuania Panama Korea Macao-China Hungaryong Kong-China Germany Croatia Portugal Chile (weekly or daily) and those who do not: Denmark Parental support at age 15 New Zealand Italy "discuss books, films or televisions programmes" Score point difference between students whose parents often do Qatar
  • 40. 13 132What students know and can do 2 Find out more about PISA at…  OECD www.pisa.oecd.org – All national and international publications Andreas Schleicher 7 December 2010 – The complete micro-level database U.S. White House www.data.gov Thank you !  Email: Andreas.Schleicher@OECD.orgPISA International Student Assessment OECD Programme for  … and remember: Without data, you are just another person with an opinion