OECD EMPLOYER
BRAND
Playbook
1
Programme for
International
Student
Assessment (PISA)
Richard Yelland
2 PISA in brief
• Over half a million students…
– representing 28 million 15-year-olds in 65 countries/economies
… took an...
3 PISA in brief
• A shared learning tool for all involved
– ‘Crowd sourcing’ and collaboration
• PISA draws together leadi...
4 The structure of the PISA assessment
2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015
Reading Reading Reading Reading Reading Reading
Mathe...
• PISA 2012:
–Student and school questionnaires
• Options:
–ICT questionnaire
–Educational career questionnaire
–Parent qu...
6
Climbing Mount Fuji
Mount Fuji is a famous dormant volcano
in Japan.
Mount Fuji is only open to the public for
climbing ...
7
Percent of 15-year-olds who scored Level 2 or Above
Shanghai-China
Singapore
HongKong-China
Korea
Estonia
Macao-China
Ja...
8
Revolving Door
A revolving door includes three wings which rotate within a circular-shaped space. The inside diameter of...
9
Percent of 15-year-olds who scored Level 6 or Above
Shanghai-China
Singapore
ChineseTaipei
HongKong-China
Korea
Japan
Ma...
Singapore
Hong Kong-ChinaChinese Taipei
Korea
Macao-China
Japan Liechtenstein
Switzerland
Netherlands
Estonia Finland
Cana...
Change in performance between PISA 2003 and 2012
Indonesia
Thailand
Russian Fed.
United States
Latvia
Spain
Norway
Luxembo...
Mathematics, reading and science Israel, Poland, Portugal, Turkey, Brazil, Dubai
(UAE), Hong Kong-China,
Macao-China, Qata...
AustraliaAustria
Belgium
Canada
Chile
Czech Rep.
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Isr...
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Shanghai-China
HongKong-China
Macao-China
VietNam
Singapore
Korea
ChineseTaipei
Japan
Liechtenst...
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
Jordan
Qatar
Thailand
Malaysia
Iceland
U.A.E.
Latvia
Singapore
Finland
Sweden
Bulgaria
Russ...
Resources make a difference…
…but only up to a point
16
Spending per student from the age of 6 to 15 and
mathematics performance in PISA 2012
Slovak Republic
Czech Republic
Eston...
Hong Kong-China
Brazil
Uruguay
Croatia
Latvia
Chinese Taipei
Thailand
Bulgaria
Jordan
Macao-China
UAE
Argentina
Indonesia
...
Video series on
Strong Performers and
Successful Reformers in
Education
http://www.pearsonfoundation.org/oecd
What’s next?
PISA 2015
20
• Main subject: Science
• Number of participants : 72
• Field trials in 2014
• Main survey 2015
• Results released in Dece...
• Engagement of all is important:
– Policy-makers
– Teachers and Schools
– Students and Parents
– Media
– Research communi...
Thank you !
Find out more about PISA at www.pisa.oecd.org
• National and international publications
• The complete micro-l...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Use of PISA in quality improvement polices – Richard Yelland, OECD Head of Policy Advice and Implementation Division

721 views

Published on

Presentation at the conference "Quality Education for Better Schools, Results and Future" organized by UNICEF and the Ministry of Education in Podgorica, July 8-10, 2014

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Use of PISA in quality improvement polices – Richard Yelland, OECD Head of Policy Advice and Implementation Division

  1. 1. OECD EMPLOYER BRAND Playbook 1 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) Richard Yelland
  2. 2. 2 PISA in brief • Over half a million students… – representing 28 million 15-year-olds in 65 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 – Mathematics, reading, science, problem-solving, financial literacy – Total of 390 minutes of assessment material … 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 .
  3. 3. 3 PISA in brief • A shared learning tool for all involved – ‘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 • Systematic integration of insights from students, parents, school principals and system-leaders – Advanced methods with different grain sizes • A range of methods to adequately measure constructs with different grain sizes to serve different decision-making needs • Productive feedback, at appropriate levels of detail, to fuel improvement at every level of the system .
  4. 4. 4 The structure of the PISA assessment 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 Reading Reading Reading Reading Reading Reading Mathemat ics Mathemati cs Mathemati cs Mathemat ics Mathematics Mathematics Science Science Science Science Science Science Problem Solving Digital Reading Problem Solving, Financial literacy, Digital Math, Digital reading Collaborative Problem Solving, Financial literacy,
  5. 5. • PISA 2012: –Student and school questionnaires • Options: –ICT questionnaire –Educational career questionnaire –Parent questionnaire 5 Questionnaires
  6. 6. 6 Climbing Mount Fuji Mount Fuji is a famous dormant volcano in Japan. Mount Fuji is only open to the public for climbing from 1 July to 27 August each year. About 200 000 people climb Mount Fuji during this time. On average, about how many people climb Mount Fuji each day? A. 340 B. 710 C. 3400 D. 7100 E. 7400 PISA 2012 Sample Question 1
  7. 7. 7 Percent of 15-year-olds who scored Level 2 or Above Shanghai-China Singapore HongKong-China Korea Estonia Macao-China Japan Finland Switzerland ChineseTaipei Canada Liechtenstein Vietnam Poland Netherlands Denmark Ireland Germany Austria Belgium Australia Latvia Slovenia CzechRepublic Iceland UnitedKingdom Norway France NewZealand OECDaverage Spain RussianFederation Luxembourg Italy Portugal UnitedStates Lithuania Sweden SlovakRepublic Hungary Croatia Israel Greece Serbia Romania Turkey Cyprus* Bulgaria Kazakhstan UnitedArabEmirates Thailand Chile Malaysia Mexico Uruguay Montenegro CostaRica Albania Argentina Brazil Tunisia Jordan Qatar Colombia Peru Indonesia 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 PISA 2012 Sample Question 1
  8. 8. 8 Revolving Door A revolving door includes three wings which rotate within a circular-shaped space. The inside diameter of this space is 2 metres (200 centimetres). The three door wings divide the space into three equal sectors. The plan below shows the door wings in three different positions viewed from the top. The two door openings (the dotted arcs in the diagram) are the same size. If these openings are too wide the revolving wings cannot provide a sealed space and air could then flow freely between the entrance and the exit, causing unwanted heat loss or gain. This is shown in the diagram opposite. What is the maximum arc length in centimetres (cm) that each door opening can have, so that air never flows freely between the entrance and the exit? Maximum arc length: ____________ cm PISA 2012 Sample Question 4
  9. 9. 9 Percent of 15-year-olds who scored Level 6 or Above Shanghai-China Singapore ChineseTaipei HongKong-China Korea Japan Macao-China Liechtenstein Switzerland Belgium Poland Germany NewZealand Netherlands Canada Australia Estonia Finland Vietnam Slovenia OECDaverage Austria CzechRepublic France SlovakRepublic UnitedKingdom Luxembourg Iceland UnitedStates Israel Ireland Italy Hungary Portugal Norway Denmark Croatia Sweden Latvia RussianFederation Lithuania Spain Turkey Serbia Bulgaria Greece Romania UnitedArabEmirates Thailand 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 PISA 2012 Sample Question 4
  10. 10. Singapore Hong Kong-ChinaChinese Taipei Korea Macao-China Japan Liechtenstein Switzerland Netherlands Estonia Finland Canada Poland Belgium Germany Viet Nam Austria Australia IrelandSlovenia DenmarkNew Zealand Czech Republic France United Kingdom Iceland LatviaLuxembourg Norway Portugal ItalySpain Russian Fed.Slovak Republic United States LithuaniaSwedenHungary Croatia Israel Greece SerbiaTurkey Romania Bulgaria U.A.E. Kazakhstan Thailand Chile Malaysia Mexico 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530 540 550 560 570 580 Mean score High mathematics performance Low mathematics performance … Shanghai-China performs above this line (613) Montenegro, with 11 countries performing below Average performance of 15-year-olds in Mathematics Fig I.2.13 US
  11. 11. Change in performance between PISA 2003 and 2012 Indonesia Thailand Russian Fed. United States Latvia Spain Norway Luxembourg Ireland Austria Switzerland Japan Liechtenstein Korea Brazil Tunisia Mexico Uruguay Turkey Greece Italy Portugal Hungary Poland Slovak Republic OECD average Germany Sweden France Denmark Iceland Czech Republic New Zealand Australia Macao-China Belgium Canada Netherlands Finland Hong Kong-China -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 350 400 450 500 550 600 Averageannualmathematicsscorechange Average mathematics performance in PISA 2003 Montenegro ImprovingperformanceDeterioratingperformance PISA 2003 performance below the OECD average PISA 2003 performance above the OECD average Fig I.2.18 11
  12. 12. Mathematics, reading and science Israel, Poland, Portugal, Turkey, Brazil, Dubai (UAE), Hong Kong-China, Macao-China, Qatar, Singapore, Tunisia Mathematics and reading Chile, Germany, Mexico, Albania, Montenegro, Serbia, Shanghai-China Mathematics and science Italy, Kazakhstan, Romania Reading and science Japan, Korea, Latvia, Thailand Mathematics only Greece, Bulgaria, Malaysia, United Arab Emirates (ex. Dubai) Reading only Estonia, Hungary, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Colombia, Indonesia, Liechtenstein, Peru, Russian Federation, Chinese Taipei Science only Ireland Of the 65 countries 45 improved at least in one subject12
  13. 13. AustraliaAustria Belgium Canada Chile Czech Rep. Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Slovak Rep. Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey UK US Singapore Hong Kong-ChinaChinese Taipei Macao-China Liechtenstein Viet Nam Latvia Russian Fed. Lithuania Croatia Serbia Romania Bulgaria United Arab Emirates Kazakhstan Thailand Malaysia Montenegro 02468101214161820222426 2012 Shanghai-China Socially equitable distribution of learning opportunities Strong socio-economic impact on student performance Performance and equity: a tradeoff ?
  14. 14. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Shanghai-China HongKong-China Macao-China VietNam Singapore Korea ChineseTaipei Japan Liechtenstein Switzerland Estonia Netherlands Poland Canada Finland Belgium Portugal Germany Turkey OECDaverage Italy Spain Latvia Ireland Australia Thailand Austria Luxembourg CzechRepublic Slovenia UnitedKingdom Lithuania France Norway Iceland NewZealand RussianFed. UnitedStates Croatia Denmark Sweden Hungary SlovakRepublic Mexico Serbia Greece Israel Tunisia Romania Malaysia Indonesia Bulgaria Kazakhstan Uruguay Brazil CostaRica Chile Colombia Montenegro U.A.E. Argentina Jordan Peru Qatar % Percentage of resilient students More than 40 % resilient Between 20%-40% of resilient students Less than 20% Fig II.2.4 14 Socio-economically disadvantaged students not only score lower in mathematics, they also report lower levels of engagement, drive, motivation and self-beliefs. Resilient students break this link and share many characteristics of advantaged high-achievers. A resilient student is situated in the bottom quarter of the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS) in the country of assessment and performs in the top quarter of students among all countries, after accounting for socio-economic status.
  15. 15. -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 Jordan Qatar Thailand Malaysia Iceland U.A.E. Latvia Singapore Finland Sweden Bulgaria RussianFed. Albania Montenegro Lithuania Kazakhstan Norway Macao-China Slovenia Romania Poland Indonesia UnitedStates Estonia ChineseTaipei Shanghai-China Belgium Turkey Greece France Hungary Serbia SlovakRepublic Vietnam Canada Netherlands OECDaverage Portugal Uruguay Croatia Israel CzechRepublic Australia UnitedKingdom Switzerland Germany Argentina Denmark Mexico NewZealand Tunisia Ireland HongKong-China Spain Brazil Japan Korea Italy Peru Austria Liechtenstein CostaRica Chile Luxembourg Colombia Score-pointdifference(boys-girls) Gender differences in mathematics performance Fig I.2.25 Boys perform better than girls Girls perform better than boys 15
  16. 16. Resources make a difference… …but only up to a point 16
  17. 17. Spending per student from the age of 6 to 15 and mathematics performance in PISA 2012 Slovak Republic Czech Republic Estonia Israel Poland Korea Portugal New Zealand Canada Germany Spain France Italy Singapore Finland Japan SloveniaIreland Iceland Netherlands Sweden Belgium UK Australia Denmark United States Austria Norway Switzerland Luxembourg Viet Nam Jordan Peru Thailand Malaysia Uruguay Turkey Colombia Tunisia Mexico Montenegro Brazil Bulgaria Chile Croatia Lithuania Latvia Hungary Shanghai-China R² = 0.01 R² = 0.37 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 0 20 000 40 000 60 000 80 000 100 000 120 000 140 000 160 000 180 000 200 000 Mathematicsperformance(scorepoints) Average spending per student from the age of 6 to 15 (USD, PPPs) Cumulative expenditure per student less than USD 50 000 Cumulative expenditure per student USD 50 000 or more Fig IV.1.8 17
  18. 18. Hong Kong-China Brazil Uruguay Croatia Latvia Chinese Taipei Thailand Bulgaria Jordan Macao-China UAE Argentina Indonesia Kazakhstan Peru Costa Rica Montenegro Tunisia Qatar Singapore Colombia Malaysia Serbia Romania Viet Nam Shanghai-China USA Poland New Zealand Greece UK Estonia Finland Slovak Rep. Luxembourg Germany AustriaFrance Japan Turkey Sweden Hungary Australia Israel Canada Ireland Chile Belgium SpainDenmark Switzerland Iceland Slovenia Portugal Norway Mexico Korea Italy R² = 0.19 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 -0.500.511.5 Mathematicsperformance(scorepoints) Equity in resource allocation (index points) Countries with better performance in mathematics tend to allocate educational resources more equitably Greater equity Less equity Adjusted by per capita GDP Fig IV.1.11 30% of the variation in math performance across OECD countries is explained by the degree of similarity of educational resources between advantaged and disadvantaged schools OECD countries tend to allocate at least an equal, if not a larger, number of teachers per student to disadvantaged schools; but disadvantaged schools tend to have great difficulty in attracting qualified teachers.
  19. 19. Video series on Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education http://www.pearsonfoundation.org/oecd
  20. 20. What’s next? PISA 2015 20
  21. 21. • Main subject: Science • Number of participants : 72 • Field trials in 2014 • Main survey 2015 • Results released in December 2016 PISA 201521
  22. 22. • Engagement of all is important: – Policy-makers – Teachers and Schools – Students and Parents – Media – Research community 22
  23. 23. Thank you ! Find out more about PISA at www.pisa.oecd.org • National and international publications • The complete micro-level database With acknowledgements to the PISA team Email: richard.yelland@oecd.org jenny.bradshaw@oecd.org

×