Seminar On PISA
•1 like•523 views
Report
Share
Download to read offline
Seminar PISA OECD
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot(20)
Similar to Seminar On PISA
Similar to Seminar On PISA(20)
More from Mushlihatun Syarifah
More from Mushlihatun Syarifah(20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded(20)
Seminar On PISA
- 1. PISA: Assessing 21st century life skills Jakarta, 8 July 2019 Andreas Schleicher
- 2. Increased likelihood of positive outcomes among adults with higher literacy skills (age 16-65) 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Being Employed High wages Good to excellent health Participation in volunteer activities High levels of political efficacy High levels oftrust (scoring at Level 4/5 on PIAAC compared with those scoring at Level 1 or below) Odds ratio
- 3. PISA in brief - 2015 In 2015, over half a million students… - representing 28 million 15-year-olds in 72 countries/economies … took an internationally agreed 2-hour test… - 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 situations - Total of 390 minutes of assessment material … and responded to questions on… - their personal background, their schools, their well-being and their motivation Parents, principals, teachers and system leaders provided data on: - school policies, practices, resources and institutional factors that help explain performance differences - 89,000 parents, 93,000 teachers and 17,500 principals responded
- 4. Map of PISA countries and economies PISA 2015 OECD Partners
- 5. PISA in brief – key principles • ‘Crowd sourcing’ and collaboration - PISA draws together leading expertise and institutions from participating countries to develop instruments and methodologies… … guided by governments on the basis of shared policy interests • Cross-national relevance and transferability of policy experiences - Emphasis on validity across cultures, languages and systems - Frameworks built on well-structured conceptual understanding of academic disciplines and contextual factors • Triangulation across different stakeholder perspectives - Comprehensive insights from students, parents, school principals and system-leaders • Advanced methods with different grain sizes - A range of methods to adequately measure what young people know and can do: different grain sizes to serve different decision-making needs - Productive feedback to fuel improvement at every level of the system
- 6. “the ability to engage with science- related issues, and with the ideas of science, as a reflective citizen” A scientifically literate person is willing to engage in reasoned discourse about science and technology Science in PISA
- 7. •Explain phenomena scientifically •Evaluate and design scientific enquiry •Interpret data and evidence scientifically Competencies Recognise, offer and evaluate explanations for a range of natural and technological phenomena. Describe and appraise scientific investigations and propose ways of addressing questions scientifically. Analyse and evaluate data, claims and arguments in a variety of representations and draw appropriate scientific conclusions.
- 8. •Explain phenomena scientifically •Evaluate and design scientific enquiry •Interpret data and evidence scientifically Knowledge •Content knowledge •Knowledge of methodological procedures used in science •Knowledge of the epistemic reasons and ideas used by scientists to justify their claims Competencies Each of the scientific competencies requires content knowledge (knowledge of theories, explanatory ideas, information and facts), but also an understanding of how such knowledge has been derived (procedural knowledge) and of the nature of that knowledge (epistemic knowledge) “Epistemic knowledge” reflects students’ capacity to think like a scientist and distinguish between observations, facts, hypotheses, models and theories
- 9. •Explain phenomena scientifically •Evaluate and design scientific enquiry •Interpret data and evidence scientifically Knowledge •Content knowledge •Knowledge of methodological procedures used in science •Knowledge of the epistemic reasons and ideas used by scientists to justify their claims Competencies Peoples’ attitudes and beliefs play a significant role in their interest, attention and response to science and technology. PISA distinguishes between attitudes towards science (e.g. interest in different content areas of science) and scientific attitudes (e.g. whether students value scientific approaches to enquiry)Attitudes •Attitudes to science •Scientific attitudes
- 10. Trends in science performance (PISA) 2006 2009 2012 2015 OECD 450 470 490 510 530 550 570 OECD average Studentperformance
- 11. Trends in science performance (PISA) 450 470 490 510 530 550 570 2006 2009 2012 2015 OECD average
- 12. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 Coverage Reading Score Math Score Reading Score (39% covered in PISA 2000) Math Score (39% covered in PISA 2000) PISA outcomes and coverage in Indonesia
- 13. Routine cognitive skills Complex ways of thinking, complex ways of doing, collective capacity Some students learn at high levels (sorting) All students need to learn at high levels Student inclusion Curriculum, instruction and assessment Standardisation and compliance High-level professional knowledge workers Teacher education ‘Tayloristic’, hierarchical Flat, collegial Work organisation Primarily to authorities Primarily to peers and stakeholders Accountability Past Future Lessons from high-performers
- 14. Some learn at high levels
- 15. All learn at high levels
- 16. 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 Singapore4 Finland3 Japan5 Estonia7 Ireland4 Macao(China)12 HongKong(China)11 Germany4 Slovenia7 Korea8 Switzerland4 Russia5 Netherlands5 CABA(Argentina)0 Poland9 Denmark11 Australia9 ChineseTaipei15 Belgium7 NewZealand10 Canada16 Spain9 Norway9 CzechRepublic6 Latvia11 Sweden6 Portugal12 France9 OECDaverage11 Iceland7 UnitedKingdom16 Croatia9 Lithuania10 UnitedStates16 Hungary10 Austria17 Malta2 Luxembourg12 Israel6 SlovakRepublic11 Italy20 Greece9 Romania7 Moldova7 B-S-J-G(China)36 UnitedArabEmirates9 Chile20 Bulgaria19 Albania16 Qatar7 VietNam51 Montenegro10 Jordan14 Uruguay28 TrinidadandTobago24 Turkey30 Georgia21 Colombia25 Thailand29 FYROM5 CostaRica37 Mexico38 Tunisia7 Peru26 Brazil29 Indonesia32 Lebanon34 Algeria21 Kosovo29 DominicanRepublic32 Level 6 Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Below Level 1b Level 1b Level 1a Student performance (PISA, Science, 15-year-olds, 2015) % Percentage of 15-year-olds not covered by the PISA sample
- 17. 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 Singapore4 Finland3 Japan5 Estonia7 Ireland4 Macao(China)12 HongKong(China)11 Germany4 Slovenia7 Korea8 Switzerland4 Russia5 Netherlands5 CABA(Argentina)0 Poland9 Denmark11 Australia9 ChineseTaipei15 Belgium7 NewZealand10 Canada16 Spain9 Norway9 CzechRepublic6 Latvia11 Sweden6 Portugal12 France9 OECDaverage11 Iceland7 UnitedKingdom16 Croatia9 Lithuania10 UnitedStates16 Hungary10 Austria17 Malta2 Luxembourg12 Israel6 SlovakRepublic11 Italy20 Greece9 Romania7 Moldova7 B-S-J-G(China)36 UnitedArabEmirates9 Chile20 Bulgaria19 Albania16 Qatar7 VietNam51 Montenegro10 Jordan14 Uruguay28 TrinidadandTobago24 Turkey30 Georgia21 Colombia25 Thailand29 FYROM5 CostaRica37 Mexico38 Tunisia7 Peru26 Brazil29 Indonesia32 Lebanon34 Algeria21 Kosovo29 DominicanRepublic32 Level 6 Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Below Level 1b Level 1b Level 1a Student performance (PISA, Science, 15-year-olds, 2015) % Percentage of 15-year-olds not covered by the PISA sample % 551% GDP 12,448 bn$ 153% GDP 27,929 bn$ 86% GDP 402 bn$ Long-term estimated economic gains from every 15-year-old achieving at least basic skills 889% GDP2 24,409 bn$
- 18. Low math performance High math performance Mathematics performance of the 10% most disadvantaged American 15-year-olds (~Mexico) Mathematics performance of the 10% most privileged American 15-year-olds (~Japan) Poverty need not be destiny: PISA math performance by decile of social background (2012) PISAmathematicsperformance
- 19. 200 300 400 500 600 700 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 PISA index of economic, social and cultural status Public schools Private schools Below 1b Level 1b Level 1a Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Lev 6 Brazil: School performance and schools’ socio-economic profile Scorepoints
- 20. 200 300 400 500 600 700 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 PISA index of economic, social and cultural status Public schools Private schools Below 1b Level 1b Level 1a Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Lev 6 Scorepoints Viet Nam: School performance and schools’ socio-economic profile
- 21. 200 300 400 500 600 700 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 PISA index of economic, social and cultural status Public schools Private schools Below 1b Level 1b Level 1a Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Lev 6 Brazil: School performance and schools’ socio-economic profile Scorepoints
- 22. 200 300 400 500 600 700 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 PISA index of economic, social and cultural status Public schools Private schools Below 1b Level 1b Level 1a Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Lev 6 Relationship between student performance and students' socio- economic status Relationship between student performance and students' socio- economic status between schools Relationship between student performance and students' socio- economic status within schools Relationship between school performance and schools’ socio-economic profile: Indonesia Scorepoints
- 23. Aligning resources with needs Average class size in <9th grade>, by quarter of school socio-economic profile 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Highly disadvantaged Disadvantaged Advantaged Highly advantaged OECD average Averageclasssize Schools by social background
- 24. %scienceteacherswithoutuniversitymajorinscience Science teachers without a university major in science, by school socio-economic profile (OECD Average) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Highly disadvantaged Disadvantaged Advantaged Highly advantaged OECD average Aligning resources with needs Schools by social background
- 25. Differences in educational resources between advantaged and disadvantaged schools Figure I.6.14 -3 -2 -2 -1 -1 0 1 1 CABA(Argentina) Mexico Peru Macao(China) UnitedArabEmirates Lebanon Jordan Colombia Brazil Indonesia Turkey Spain DominicanRepublic Georgia Uruguay Thailand B-S-J-G(China) Australia Japan Chile Luxembourg Russia Portugal Malta Italy NewZealand Croatia Ireland Algeria Norway Israel Denmark Sweden UnitedStates Moldova Belgium Slovenia OECDaverage Hungary ChineseTaipei VietNam CzechRepublic Singapore Tunisia Greece TrinidadandTobago Canada Romania Qatar Montenegro Kosovo Netherlands Korea Finland Switzerland Germany HongKong(China) Austria FYROM Poland Albania Bulgaria SlovakRepublic Lithuania Estonia Iceland CostaRica UnitedKingdom Latvia Meanindexdifferencebetweenadvantaged anddisadvantagedschools Index of shortage of educational material Index of shortage of educational staff Disadvantaged schools have more resources than advantaged schools Disadvantaged schools have fewer resources than advantaged schools
- 27. Creating knowledge Think for yourself and work with others
- 28. The rise of the global middle class 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1951 1957 1963 1969 1975 1981 1987 1993 1999 2005 2011 2017 2023 2029 Headcount(billions) %ofworldpopulation World middle class share of world population World middle class World population Within the next decade the majority of the world population will consist of the middle class Estimates of the size of the global middle class, percentage of the world population (left axis) and headcount (right axis) Source: Kharas, H. (2017), The unprecedented expansion of the global middle class, an update, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/global_20170228_global-middle-class.pdf. Kharas, H. (2010), The emerging middle class in developing countries, https://www.oecd.org/dev/44457738.pdf. Figure 1.2
- 29. Growing unequal Income gaps continues to grow Trends in real household incomes by percentile, OECD average, 1985-2015 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Bottom 10% Mean Median Top 10% Source: OECD (2018), A Broken Social Elevator? How to Promote Social Mobility, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264301085-en. Figure 2.1 Index 1985 = 1
- 30. Rising volatility Household savings and debt Household savings (% of disposable income, left axis) and household debt (% of disposable income, right axis), OECD average, 1970-2016 Source: OECD (2018), OECD National Accounts Statistics (database), https://stats.oecd.org/. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 Debtas%ofdisposableincome Savingsas%ofdisposableincome Savings (left axis) Debt (right axis) Figure 3.9
- 31. The growth in AI technologies… 0 2 000 4 000 6 000 8 000 10 000 12 000 14 000 16 000 18 000 20 000 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 Numberofpatents Number of patents in artificial intelligence technologies, 1991-2015 Source: OECD (2017), OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2017: The digital transformation, ht tp://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264268821-en. Figure 1.10 …pushes us to think harder about what makes us truly human
- 32. 32 Digitalisation Democratizing Concentrating Particularizing Homogenizing Empowering Disempowering
- 34. 34 Digitalisation Democratizing Concentrating Particularizing Homogenizing Empowering Disempowering The post-truth world where reality becomes fungible • Virality seems privileged over quality in the distribution of information • Truth and fact are losing currency Scarcity of attention and abundance of information • Algorithms sort us into groups of like-minded individuals create echo chambers that amplify our views, leave us uninformed of opposing arguments, and polarise our societies
- 37. Creating new value connotes processes of creating, making, bringing into being and formulating; and outcomes that are innovative, fresh and original, contributing something of intrinsic positive worth. The constructs that underpin the competence are creativity/ creative thinking/ inventive thinking, curiosity, global mind-set, … . In a structurally imbalanced world, the imperative of reconciling diverse perspectives and interests, in local settings with sometimes global implications, will require young people to become adept in handling tensions, dilemmas and trade-offs. Underlying constructs are empathy, resilience/stress resistance trust, … Dealing with novelty, change, diversity and ambiguity assumes that individuals can think for themselves and work with others. This suggests a sense of responsibility, and moral and intellectual maturity, with which a person can reflect upon and evaluate their actions in the light of their experiences and personal and societal goals; what they have been taught and told; and what is right or wrong Underlying constructs include critical thinking skills, meta-learning skills (including learning to learn skills), mindfulness, problem solving skills, responsibility, …
- 38. Anticipation mobilises cognitive skills, such as analytical or critical thinking, to foresee what may be needed in the future or how actions taken today might have consequences for the future Reflective practice is the ability to take a critical stance when deciding, choosing and acting, by stepping back from what is known or assumed and looking at a situation from other, different perspectives Both reflective practice and anticipation contribute to the willingness to take responsible actions
- 39. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 CriticalThinking Com m unication Problem Solving Cooperation/CollaborationRespect Self-Regulation Persistence/ResilienceEm pathy CreativeThinking ConflictResolution Responsibility StudentAgency ReflectionAction Anticipation GlobalCom petency DigitalLiteracy LiteracyforSD Com putationalThinking Entrepreneurship Arts Humanities Mathematics National Language/s PE/Health Science Technologies Numberofmappedcontentitems Skills, Attitudes and Values Key concepts 2030 Learning Framework Competency Development Cycle Compound competencies for 2030 Current curricula and 2030 aspirations Preliminary findings of curriculum content mapping (lower secondary; Ontario, Canada)
- 40. Current curricula and 2030 aspirations Preliminary findings of curriculum content mapping (lower secondary; Japan) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 CriticalThinking Com m unication Problem Solving Cooperation/CollaborationRespect Self-Regulation Persistence/ResilienceEm pathy CreativeThinking ConflictResolution Responsibility StudentAgency ReflectionAction Anticipation GlobalCom petency DigitalLiteracy LiteracyforSD Com putationalThinking Entrepreneurship Arts Humanities Mathematics National Language/s PE/Health Science Technologies Numberofmappedcontentitems Skills, Attitudes and Values Key concepts 2030 Learning Framewo rk Competency Development Cycle Compound competencies for 2030
- 41. The kind of things that are easy to teach are now easy to automate, digitize or outsource 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2006 2009 Routine manual Nonroutine manual Routine cognitive Nonroutine analytic Nonroutine interpersonal Mean task input in percentiles of 1960 task distribution
- 42. What teachers say and what teachers do
- 43. 96% of teachers: My role as a teacher is to facilitate students own inquiry
- 44. 86%: Students learn best by findings solutions on their own
- 45. 74%: Thinking and reasoning is more important than curriculum content
- 46. -2.00 -1.50 -1.00 -0.50 0.00 Prevalence of memorisation rehearsal, routine exercises, drill and practice and/or repetition 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 Switzerland Poland Germany Japan Korea France Sweden Shanghai-China Canada Singapore United States Norway Spain Netherlands United Kingdom Prevalence of elaboration reasoning, deep learning, intrinsic motivation, critical thinking, creativity, non-routine problems High Low Low High
- 47. Memorisation is less useful as problems become more difficult (OECD average) R² = 0.81 0.70 1.00 300 400 500 600 700 800 Complexity of of mathematics tasks on the PISA scale Source: Figure 4.3 47 Difficult problem Easy problem Greater success Less success Odds ratio
- 48. Elaboration strategies are more useful as problems become more difficult (OECD average) R² = 0.82 0.80 1.50 300 400 500 600 700 800 Complexity of mathematics tasks on the PISA scaleSource: Figure 6.2 48 Difficult problem Greater success Less success Easy problem Odds ratio
- 49. Students’ use of elaboration strategies Source: Figure 6.1 UnitedKingdom20 Iceland18 Australia20 Ireland23 France19 NewZealand19 Israel26 Canada26 Austria32 Japan29 Belgium22 Singapore31 Uruguay22 Germany33 Netherlands24 HK-China30 Luxembourg33 CostaRica33 Norway23 Finland23 UnitedStates30 Portugal29 OECDaverage30 Denmark23 Indonesia38 Switzerland32 Bulgaria27 Macao-China32 Chile24 Albania33 Sweden24 Kazakhstan29 Greece35 UAE32 Hungary37 Brazil25 Argentina35 Liechtenstein41 Estonia38 Mexico27 Spain39 Turkey28 Shanghai-China35 Poland27 Colombia33 Korea43 Latvia32 CzechRepublic40 VietNam41 Croatia48 Slovenia56 Romania36 RussianFed.41 Montenegro39 Malaysia38 Peru30 Italy46 Serbia50 SlovakRepublic40 Lithuania30 Thailand34 Qatar34 ChineseTaipei42 Jordan44 Tunisia44 Belowthe OECD average At the same level as the OECD average Above the OECD average % of students who understand new concepts by relating them to things they already know 49 Elaboration More Less
- 50. Selected skills • SSES: 19 skills selected for the initial testing • SSES: 15 skills will be included in the main study • PISA 2021: possible skills for inclusion: – Self-control – Persistence – Curiosity – Perspective taking – Empathy – Trust – Emotional control – Resilience SOCIABILITY CURIOSITY EMPATHY ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION STRESSRESISTANCE RESPONSIBILITY SELF-CONTROL OPTIMISMEMOTIONAL CONTROL TRUST TOLERANCE ASSERTIVENESS CRITICAL THINKING CO-OPERATION META-COGNITION SELF-EFFICACY PERSISTENCE ENERGY CREATIVITY EMOTIONAL REGULATION TASK PERFORMANCE THE ‘BIG FIVE’ DOMAINS ENGAGING WITH OTHERS COMPOUND SKILLS COLLABORATION OPEN- MINDEDNESS
- 51. STRONGEST RELATIONS WITH GRADES IN MATH -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Persistence Curiosity Self-efficacy Optimism Correlation Math
- 52. STRONGEST RELATIONS WITH GRADES IN ART 0 0.1 0.2 Creativity Persistence Self-control Correlation Art
- 53. RELATIONSHIP WITH CHILD’S HEALTH 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Socio-demographics Parent education Income SE skills %ofexplainedvariance General health
- 54. RELATIONSHIP OF SE SKILLS WITH HEALTH- RELATED BEHAVIOURS § Best predictors: Self-control, Optimism 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Socio-demographics Parent education Income SE skills %ofexplainedvariance Sleep 8 hours or more
- 55. Some lessons from high performers • Rigor, focus and coherence • Remain true to the disciplines – but aim at interdisciplinary learning and the capacity of students to see problems through multiple lenses – Balance knowledge of disciplines and knowledge about disciplines • Focus on areas with the highest transfer value – Requiring a theory of action for how this transfer value occurs • Authenticity – Thematic, problem-based, project-based, co-creation in conversation • Some things are caught not taught – Immersive learning propositions
- 56. Prescription
- 57. Ownership of professional practice Powerful learning environments are constantly creating synergies and finding new ways to enhance professional, social and cultural capital with others. They do that with families and communities, with higher education, with other schools and learning environments, and with businesses.
- 58. Learning time and science performance (PISA) Figure II.6.23 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Finland Germany Switzerland Japan Estonia Sweden Netherlands NewZealand Australia CzechRepublic Macao(China) UnitedKingdom Canada Belgium France Norway Slovenia Iceland Luxembourg Ireland Latvia HongKong(China) OECDaverage ChineseTaipei Austria Portugal Uruguay Lithuania Singapore Denmark Hungary Poland SlovakRepublic Spain Croatia UnitedStates Israel Bulgaria Korea Russia Italy Greece B-S-J-G(China) Colombia Chile Mexico Brazil CostaRica Turkey Montenegro Peru Qatar Thailand UnitedArabEmirates Tunisia DominicanRepublic Scorepointsinscienceperhouroflearningtime Hours Intended learning time at school (hours) Study time after school (hours) Score points in science per hour of total learning time Time in school Learning out of school Productivity
- 59. Making teaching not just financially, but intellectually more attractive Public confidence in profession and professionals Professional preparation and learning Collective ownership of professional practice Decisions made in accordance with the body of knowledge o the profession Professional responsibility in the name of the profession and accountability towards the profession
- 60. Policy levers to teacher professionalism Knowledge base for teaching (initial education and incentives for professional development) Autonomy: Teachers’ decision- making power over their work (teaching content, course offerings, discipline practices) Peer networks: Opportunities for exchange and support needed to maintain high standards of teaching (participation in induction, mentoring, networks, feedback from direct observations) Teacher professionalism Policy levers to teacher professionalism
- 61. Teacher professional collaboration 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Discussindividualstudents Shareresources Teamconferences Collaborateforcommon standards Teamteaching CollaborativePD Jointactivities Classroomobservations Percentageofteachers Professional collaboration Percentage of lower secondary teachers who report doing the following activities at least once per month Exchange and co-ordination (OECD countries)
- 62. 11.40 11.60 11.80 12.00 12.20 12.40 12.60 12.80 13.00 13.20 13.40 Never Onceayearorless 2-4timesayear 5-10timesayear 1-3timesamonth Onceaweekormore Teacherself-efficacy(level) Teach jointly as a team in the same class Observe other teachers’ classes and provide feedback Engage in joint activities across different classes Take part in collaborative professional learning Less frequently More frequently Teachers’ self-efficacy and professional collaboration
- 63. Student-teacher ratios and class size Figure II.6.14 CABA (Argentina) Jordan Viet Nam Poland United States Chile Denmark Hungary B-S-G-J (China) Turkey Georgia Chinese Taipei Mexico Russia Albania Hong Kong (China) Japan Belgium Algeria Colombia Peru Macao (China) Switzerland Malta Dominican Republic Netherlands Singapore Brazil Kosovo Finland Thailand R² = 0.25 5 10 15 20 25 30 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Student-teacherratio Class size in language of instruction High student-teacher ratios and small class sizes Low student-teacher ratios and large class sizes OECD average OECDaverage
- 64. Teachers’ job satisfaction and class size 10.00 10.50 11.00 11.50 12.00 12.50 13.00 15 or less 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36 or more Teachers'jobsatisfaction(level) Class size (number of students)
- 65. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Low professionalism High professionalism Fig II.3.3 Perceptions of teachers’ status Satisfaction with the profession Satisfaction with the work environment Teachers’ self-efficacy Teacher job satisfaction and professionalism
- 66. Teachers perception of the value of teaching 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Singapore Korea Finland Alberta (Canada) Flanders (Belgium) Shanghai (China) NewZealand Russia Netherlands Australia England(UK) UnitedStates Average Norway Japan Latvia Denmark Poland Iceland Estonia Czech Republic Portugal Sweden France Percentageofteachers Fig II.3.3 Percentage of lower secondary teachers who "agree" or "strongly agree" that teaching profession is a valued profession in society
- 67. Australia Brazil Bulgaria Chile Croatia Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Iceland IsraelItaly Japan Korea Latvia Mexico Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Romania Serbia Singapore Slovak Republic SpainSweden Alberta (Canada) England (United Kingdom) Flanders (Belgium) United States 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Shareofmathematicstopperformers Percentage of teachers who agree that teaching is valued in society Countries where teachers believe their profession is valued show higher levels of excellence in learning outcomes (PISA) 6 7 Relationship between lower secondary teachers' views on the value of their profession in society and the country’s share of top mathematics performers in PISA 2012
- 68. Standardisation and Conformity Standardisation and compliance lead students to be e ducated in batches of age, following the same standar d curriculum, all assessed at the same time.
- 69. Ingenious Building instruction from student passions and capacities, helping students personalise their learning and assessme nt in ways that foster engagement and talents.
- 70. % Yes No If I am more innovative in my teaching I will be rewarded (country average)
- 73. • Balancing breadth and depth of framework coverage – Core assessments in reading, math and science every three years • With focus (increased sample) rotating – One innovative assessment area every three years • Digital literacy (2009) • Individual problem-solving (2012) • Collaborative problem-solving (2015) • Global competency (2018) • Creative thinking (2021) – Matrix sampling with adaptive assessment instruments Design choices and trade-offs
- 74. 47th meeting of the PISA Governing Board Individual enablers Forms of engagementSocial Enablers Domain readiness Goal orientation & beliefs Openness Cognitive skills & approaches Motivation Collaboration with others Creative expression Knowledge creation Innovative solutions to problems Cultural norms & expectations Classroom climate Educational approaches Creative thinking in the classroom
- 75. 47th meeting of the PISA Governing Board Individual enablers Forms of engagementSocial Enablers Domain readiness Goal orientation & beliefs Openness Cognitive skills & approaches Motivation Collaboration with others Creative expression Knowledge creation Innovative solutions to problems Cultural norms & expectations Classroom climate Educational approaches Creative thinking in the classroom
- 76. 47th meeting of the PISA Governing Board Competency model for PISA CT Generate Creative Ideas Evaluate and Improve Ideas Generate Diverse Ideas Focuses on students’ capacities to think flexibly across domains: for example, providing different solutions for a problem, writing different story ideas, or creating different ways to visually represent an idea.
- 77. 47th meeting of the PISA Governing Board Competency model for PISA CT Generate Creative Ideas Evaluate and Improve Ideas Generate Diverse Ideas focuses on students’ capacities to search for original ideas across domains: for example, an original story idea, an original way to communicate an idea in visual form, or an original solution to a social or scientific problem.
- 78. 47th meeting of the PISA Governing Board Competency model for PISA CT Generate Creative Ideas Evaluate and Improve Ideas Generate Diverse Ideas focuses on students’ capacities to evaluate limitations in given ideas and find original ways to improve them
- 79. 47th meeting of the PISA Governing Board Competency model for PISA CT Generate Creative Ideas Evaluate and Improve Ideas Generate Diverse Ideas
- 80. Find out more about our work at www.oecd.org/pisa – All publications – The complete micro-level database Email: Andreas.Schleicher@OECD.org Twitter: SchleicherOECD Wechat: AndreasSchleicher Thank you