Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
عمليات تقويم الـIeaتقويم إصلاح وتحسين السياسة التعليمية
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

عمليات تقويم الـIeaتقويم إصلاح وتحسين السياسة التعليمية

183
views

Published on

د. هانز واقميكر المركز: المدير التنفيذي للمنظمة الدولية لتقيم التحصيل التربوي …

د. هانز واقميكر المركز: المدير التنفيذي للمنظمة الدولية لتقيم التحصيل التربوي
(IEA) نيوزيلندا


0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
183
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
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. IEA’  Assessments:  Assessment  for  Policy  Reform  and  Improvement      Dr  Hans  Wagemaker  INTERNATIONAL  ASSOCIATION  FOR  THE  EVALUATION  OF  EDUCATIONAL  ACHIEVEMENT    
  • 2. Impetus  for  ILSA    •  Growing  demand  for  data/evidence  based  policy  development.  •  Growing  concerns  related  to  quality  of  outcomes,  equity,  efficiency-­‐  move  away  from  focus  on  inputs.  •  GlobalizaSon  and  changing  economic  base  from  industrialized  to  knowledge  based  economies.          
  • 3. The  Demand  for  evidence  •  “At  all  level  in  an  educaSonal  system,  from  the  teacher  in  the  classroom,  through  the  administrator  to  the  policymaker,  decision  have  conSnually  to  be  made,  most  of  the  Sme  on  the  basis  of  very  liVle  factual  informaSon’  (Postlethwaite,  1974).          
  • 4. Why  InternaSonal  Comparisons  •   “If  custom  and  law  define  what  is  educaSonally  allowable  within  a  naSon,  the  educaSonal  systems  beyond  one’s  naSonal  boundaries  suggest  what  is  educaSonally  possible”(Foshay  1962:p.  2).      
  • 5. The  Growth  of  ILSA  •  Decades  since  the  mid  80’s  growth  in  Providers  •  IEA:TIMSS,  PIRLS,  pre-­‐PIRLS,  ICCS,  TED’s-­‐M  •  OECD  PISA,  TALIS,  PIACC  •  UNESCO:  LLECE,  SACMEQ  •  CONFENMEN:  PASEC  •  Increased  diversity  –  economic,  cultural,  linguisSc          
  • 6. CumulaSve  growth  in  unique  IEA  parScipants  over  the  decades  (beginning  of  each  decade)          23  30  53  72  100  4  17  32  0  20  40  60  80  100  120  140  1970   1980   1990   2000   2011  Benchmarking  ParScipants  Regular  ParScipants  
  • 7. Design  •  Grade  Based  RepresentaSve  Probability  Sample  •  Key  TransiSon  Points  (viz.  PIRLS)  •  Curriculum  Model-­‐  intended,  implemented,  achieved  curriculum  Knowledge,  Aitudes,  Skills,  DisposiSons-­‐  POLICY  FOCUS  •  Comprehensive  background  data,  Country,  School,  Teacher,  Student,  Parent  •  Trend  Design.            
  • 8.    Understanding  ILSA    Analysis  beyond  the  mean  and  InternaSonal  Rankings.  Intended  to  provide  insights  into  factors  contribuSng  to  our  understanding  of  outcomes.  Needs  to  be  integrated  with  contextual  informaSon.  Needs  to  be  understood  as  both  process  and  product.    
  • 9. ReporSng  Strategy  •  Achievement  Outcomes-­‐  overall,  sub-­‐domains,  achievement  benchmarks,  relaSonship  with  background  scales  •  Encyclopedia  •  ThemaSc  Reports  •  Technical  Reports  •  InternaSonal  Databases  •  Released  Materials      
  • 10. Assessment  for  Policy  Reform  and  Improvement          
  • 11.    PercentilesofPerformance95%ConfidenceIntervalforAverage(±2SE)5th 25th 75th 95thBotswana 419(3.7) iΨ Honduras 396(5.5) iЖ Yemen 348(5.7) iBenchmarkingParticipants12 NorthCarolina,US 554(4.2) h13 Florida,US 545(2.9) hQuebec,Canada 533(2.4) hOntario,Canada 518(3.1) h2 Alberta,Canada 507(2.5) hDubai,UAE 468(1.6) iAbuDhabi,UAE 417(4.6) ih CountryaveragesignificantlyhigherthanthecenterpointoftheTIMSS4thgradescalei CountryaveragesignificantlylowerthanthecenterpointoftheTIMSS4thgradescale100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800TIMSS  2011  Grade  4  
  • 12. Grade  4  MathemaScs  Advanced  and  Low  InternaSonal  Benchmark  •  Advanced  625:    Students  can  apply  their  understanding  in  a  variety  of  relaSvely  complex  situaSons  and  explain  reasoning  …Can  solve  mulS  step  problems  involving  whole    numbers  and  proporSons  …  increased  understanding  of  fracSons  and  decimals  •   Low  400:  Some  basic  mathemaScal  knowledge-­‐  can  add  and  subtract  whole  numbers  read  and  complete  simple  graphs            
  • 13.    Percentage  of  G4  mathemaScs  populaSon  reaching  internaSonal  benchmarks-­‐TIMSS  2011  43   39  4   1  78   80  23  9  94   97  58  33  99   100  85  64  1   0  15  26  0%  10%  20%  30%  40%  50%  60%  70%  80%  90%  100%  Singapore   Korea   New  Zealand   Iran  Below  Low  Low  Intermediate  High  Advanced  
  • 14.        Exhibit3.1: AchievementinMathematicsContentDomainsCountryOverallMathematicsAverageScaleScoreNumber GeometricShapesandMeasures DataDisplayAverageScaleScoreDifferencefromOverallMathematicsScoreAverageScaleScoreDifferencefromOverallMathematicsScoreAverageScaleScoreDifferencefromOverallMathematicsScore2Singapore 606(3.2) 619(3.4) 13(0.8) h 589(3.6) –17(1.5) i 588(3.4) –18(1.7) iKorea,Rep.of 605(1.9) 606(2.0) 1(1.6) 607(1.7) 2(1.4) 603(1.9) –2(2.0)2HongKongSAR 602(3.4) 604(3.3) 3(1.0) h 605(3.4) 3(0.9) h 593(3.6) –8(2.1) iChineseTaipei 591(2.0) 599(2.0) 8(1.2) h 573(2.1) –19(1.3) i 600(2.6) 9(1.6) hJapan 585(1.7) 584(1.6) –1(0.9) 589(2.0) 4(1.1) h 590(2.9) 4(2.9)†NorthernIreland 562(2.9) 566(2.9) 4(1.6) h 560(3.3) –2(2.1) 555(3.0) –8(1.5) iBelgium(Flemish) 549(1.9) 552(2.2) 2(1.4) 552(2.0) 3(1.0) h 536(3.0) –13(2.0) iFinland 545(2.3) 545(2.3) 0(0.9) 543(2.9) –2(2.2) 551(3.5) 5(3.2)England 542(3.5) 539(3.7) –3(1.1) i 545(3.9) 3(1.6) 549(4.6) 7(2.9) hAchievementinMathematicsContentDomains
  • 15.        Exhibit3.4: AchievementinMathematicsCognitiveDomainsCountryOverallMathematicsAverageScaleScoreKnowing Applying ReasoningAverageScaleScoreDifferencefromOverallMathematicsScoreAverageScaleScoreDifferencefromOverallMathematicsScoreAverageScaleScoreDifferencefromOverallMathematicsScoreKorea,Rep.of 613(2.9) 616(2.9) 3(1.9) 617(2.9) 4(1.1) h 612(2.5) 0(1.0)2Singapore 611(3.8) 617(3.8) 6(1.0) h 613(3.9) 2(0.7) h 604(4.3) –7(1.0) iChineseTaipei 609(3.2) 611(3.7) 2(1.4) 614(3.5) 5(1.7) h 609(3.4) 0(1.5)HongKongSAR 586(3.8) 591(3.9) 6(1.2) h 587(3.7) 2(1.0) 580(3.9) –6(1.1) iJapan 570(2.6) 558(2.7) –12(1.5) i 574(2.5) 4(1.3) h 579(3.0) 9(1.8) h2RussianFederation 539(3.6) 548(3.6) 9(1.0) h 538(3.5) –1(1.3) 531(3.7) –8(1.2) i3Israel 516(4.1) 516(4.1) 0(1.1) 513(4.4) –3(1.4) i 520(4.0) 4(1.7) hFinland 514(2.5) 508(2.5) –6(1.0) i 520(2.5) 6(1.4) h 512(2.7) –2(1.5)2UnitedStates 509(2.6) 519(2.7) 10(0.8) h 503(2.8) –6(1.0) i 503(2.7) –6(0.7) i‡England 507(5.5) 501(5.4) –5(1.1) i 508(5.5) 2(1.2) 510(5.5) 3(2.0): AchievementinMathematicsCognitiveDomains
  • 16.        Exhibit4.6: StudentsSpeaktheLanguageoftheTestatHomeReportedbyStudentsCountryAlwaysorAlmostAlways Sometimes NeverPercentofStudentsAverageAchievementPercentofStudentsAverageAchievementPercentofStudentsAverageAchievementArmenia 94(0.5) 469(2.7) 5(0.4) 440(6.5) 1(0.1) ~~Australia 93(0.9) 504(5.0) 6(0.8) 516(10.4) 1(0.2) ~~Bahrain 77(0.7) 405(2.2) 18(0.6) 439(4.2) 5(0.5) 384(9.3)Chile 96(0.3) 419(2.6) 4(0.3) 362(7.8) 0(0.1) ~~ChineseTaipei 92(0.7) 616(3.0) 7(0.6) 535(7.7) 1(0.2) ~~England 95(0.7) 508(5.5) 4(0.6) 491(11.9) 1(0.2) ~~Finland 97(0.4) 515(2.5) 2(0.3) ~~ 1(0.1) ~~: StudentsSpeaktheLanguageoftheTestatHome
  • 17.    Exhibit3.11: AchievementinMathematicsCognitiveDomainsbyGenderCountryKnowing Applying ReasoningGirls Boys Girls Boys Girls BoysArmenia 463(4.2) 459(4.3) 450(4.5) h 443(4.1) 444(4.6) 441(4.5)Australia 513(4.0) 520(4.6) 517(3.5) 521(3.7) 509(3.0) 518(3.8) hAustria 505(2.6) 510(3.1) 499(2.9) 512(3.3) h 505(3.4) 521(4.0) h2 Azerbaijan 476(7.1) 470(6.5) 461(6.6) 454(6.2) 449(6.5) 441(6.4)Bahrain 440(4.7) 436(4.8) 436(4.7) 426(4.3) 439(4.5) 440(4.5)Belgium(Flemish) 562(2.1) 567(2.5) 542(2.6) 549(2.4) h 527(3.4) 537(2.7) hChile 452(3.2) 459(2.9) h 459(3.2) 467(3.0) h 461(3.0) 476(3.3) hChineseTaipei 599(3.0) 599(2.5) 596(2.6) 591(2.3) 578(3.8) 577(2.5)2 Croatia 490(3.0) 499(2.5) h 477(2.5) 491(2.4) h 487(2.9) 498(4.1) hCzechRepublic 497(3.0) 507(3.2) h 505(3.2) 519(3.2) h 520(3.1) 525(3.3)2 Denmark 527(3.1) 536(3.2) h 537(3.0) 541(3.5) 541(3.5) 544(3.2)England 550(4.6) 554(5.0) 540(4.1) 544(4.2) 529(5.0) 533(3.8)Finland 543(2.8) 553(3.1) h 540(3.0) 548(3.1) h 543(3.2) 548(3.2)1 Georgia 452(3.4) 447(4.7) 452(3.3) h 443(4.5) 452(3.6) 449(4.4)Germany 518(2.5) 529(2.9) h 525(2.6) 531(2.8) 526(3.1) 538(3.8) hAchievementinMathematicsCognitiveDomainsbyGender
  • 18.        Exhibit4.10: StudentsAttendedPreprimaryEducation*CurriculumReportedbyNationalResearchCoordinatorsandPreprimaryAttendanceReportedbyParentsCountryNationalPreprimaryCurriculumIncludesMathematicsSkillsStudentsAttendedPreprimaryEducation3YearsorMoreLessthan3YearsbutMorethan1Year1YearorLess DidNotAttendPercentofStudentsAverageAchievementPercentofStudentsAverageAchievementPercentofStudentsAverageAchievementPercentofStudentsAverageAchievementHungary k 86(0.9) 526(3.1) 12(0.7) 473(6.6) 1(0.3) ~~ 0(0.1) ~~Italy k 74(0.9) 515(2.6) 23(0.8) 497(3.4) 1(0.2) ~~ 1(0.2) ~~Germany r j 74(0.9) 536(2.3) 23(0.9) 528(3.0) 1(0.2) ~~ 1(0.2) ~~Sweden k 74(1.1) 513(2.0) 20(1.0) 499(2.7) 2(0.4) ~~ 3(0.4) 485(8.5)Norway k 72(1.6) 500(3.1) 24(1.4) 486(3.8) 2(0.2) ~~ 3(0.5) 490(11.4)Austria j 69(1.5) 511(3.0) 27(1.3) 509(3.7) 3(0.7) 500(7.5) 1(0.1) ~~RussianFederation j 68(1.3) 545(3.5) 14(0.8) 542(5.5) 3(0.3) 530(10.0) 15(1.0) 531(6.4)HongKongSAR k 68(1.0) 609(2.9) 31(1.0) 604(2.8) 1(0.1) ~~ 0(0.1) ~~CzechRepublic j 68(1.1) 516(2.8) 28(0.9) 507(3.2) 3(0.4) 508(7.2) 1(0.2) ~~Spain k 66(1.1) 492(2.8) 28(1.0) 474(4.0) 4(0.4) 466(6.4) 3(0.3) 469(7.9)SlovakRepublic 65(1.3) 520(3.1) 24(0.8) 497(4.4) 8(0.7) 483(6.7) 4(0.7) 464(16.4)Exhibit4.10:StudentsAttendedPreprimaryEducation*
  • 19.    The  Challenge  of  Growth  and  enhancing  Impact  •   Detail  is  important-­‐  understand  purpose  •  Thinking  globally  analysing/acSng  locally  •  ILSA  as  process  and  product    •  IntegraSon  of  Framework,  Encyclopaedia,  Background  data,  Technical  reports.  Quality  Assurance  procedures,  Training  •  Need  strategic  investment/vision/ownership  •  Enhance  basic  template.  •  Training  •  Policy  -­‐Research  integraSon    
  • 20.        
  • 21.    Dr  Hans  Wagemaker  INTERNATIONAL  ASSOCIATION  FOR  THE  EVALUATION  OF  EDUCATIONAL  ACHIEVEMENT    TextTextThank  You!      hanswagemaker@compuserve.com