Thailand Falling Again in Pisa Tests Meducation

Scholastic performance written report by the OECD

Programme for International Student Assessment

Abridgement	PISA
Formation	1997
Purpose	Comparison of education attainment across the earth
Headquarters	OECD Headquarters
Location	ii rue André Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16
Region served	World
Membership	79 government education departments
Official language	English language and French
Head of the Early Childhood and Schools Division	Yuri Belfali
Main organ	PISA Governing Torso (Chair – Michele Bruniges)
Parent organisation	OECD
Website	oecd.org/pisa

PISA average Mathematics scores (2018)

PISA boilerplate Scientific discipline scores (2018)

PISA average Reading scores (2018)

The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a worldwide study by the Organization for Economic Co-performance and Development (OECD) in member and not-member nations intended to evaluate educational systems by measuring 15-yr-old school pupils' scholastic performance on mathematics, scientific discipline, and reading.^[ane] It was kickoff performed in 2000 and then repeated every three years. Its aim is to provide comparable data with a view to enabling countries to improve their instruction policies and outcomes. It measures problem solving and cognition.^[ii]

The results of the 2018 data collection were released on three December 2019.^[3]

Influence and impact [edit]

PISA, and like international standardised assessments of educational attainment are increasingly used in the process of teaching policymaking at both national and international levels.^[four]

PISA was conceived to fix in a wider context the information provided past national monitoring of education system performance through regular assessments within a common, internationally agreed framework; by investigating relationships between educatee learning and other factors they can "offer insights into sources of variation in performances within and between countries".^[five]

Until the 1990s, few European countries used national tests. In the 1990s, ten countries / regions introduced standardised cess, and since the early 2000s, ten more followed suit. Past 2009, but five European teaching systems had no national student assessments.^[4]

The impact of these international standardised assessments in the field of educational policy has been significant, in terms of the creation of new noesis, changes in cess policy, and external influence over national educational policy more broadly.

Creation of new knowledge [edit]

Data from international standardised assessments can be useful in research on causal factors within or across teaching systems.^[4] Mons notes that the databases generated by large-scale international assessments have fabricated it possible to carry out inventories and comparisons of education systems on an unprecedented scale* on themes ranging from the weather for learning mathematics and reading, to institutional autonomy and admissions policies.^[6] They allow typologies to exist developed that can exist used for comparative statistical analyses of education performance indicators, thereby identifying the consequences of different policy choices. They have generated new knowledge about education: PISA findings have challenged deeply embedded educational practices, such as the early on tracking of students into vocational or academic pathways.^[7]

• 79 countries and economies participated in the 2018 data collection.

Barroso and de Carvalho discover that PISA provides a mutual reference connecting academic enquiry in educational activity and the political realm of public policy, operating as a mediator between different strands of knowledge from the realm of education and public policy.^[8] However, although the key findings from comparative assessments are widely shared in the research customs^[4] the noesis they create does non necessarily fit with government reform agendas; this leads to some inappropriate uses of cess data.

Changes in national assessment policy [edit]

Emerging research suggests that international standardised assessments are having an impact on national assessment policy and practice. PISA is being integrated into national policies and practices on assessment, evaluation, curriculum standards and operation targets; its assessment frameworks and instruments are being used as best-practice models for improving national assessments; many countries have explicitly incorporated and emphasise PISA-like competencies in revised national standards and curricula; others utilize PISA data to complement national data and validate national results against an international benchmark.^[7]

External influence over national educational policy [edit]

More than of import than its influence on countries' policy of educatee assessment, is the range of means in which PISA is influencing countries teaching policy choices.

Policy-makers in almost participating countries run into PISA as an important indicator of system operation; PISA reports can ascertain policy problems and set the agenda for national policy argue; policymakers seem to accept PISA equally a valid and reliable instrument for internationally benchmarking arrangement operation and changes over time; most countries—irrespective of whether they performed above, at, or beneath the boilerplate PISA score—have begun policy reforms in response to PISA reports.^[7]

Confronting this, impact on national teaching systems varies markedly. For example, in Germany, the results of the kickoff PISA assessment caused the so-called 'PISA shock': a questioning of previously accustomed educational policies; in a state marked past jealously guarded regional policy differences, information technology led ultimately to an understanding by all Länder to introduce common national standards and even an institutionalised structure to ensure that they were observed.^[nine] In Hungary, by comparison, which shared similar atmospheric condition to Frg, PISA results have not led to significant changes in educational policy.^[10]

Because many countries accept fix national performance targets based on their relative rank or absolute PISA score, PISA assessments have increased the influence of their (non-elected) commissioning body, the OECD, as an international instruction monitor and policy actor, which implies an important degree of 'policy transfer' from the international to the national level; PISA in particular is having "an influential normative event on the direction of national education policies".^[seven] Thus, it is argued that the utilize of international standardised assessments has led to a shift towards international, external accountability for national organisation performance; Rey contends that PISA surveys, portrayed as objective, third-party diagnoses of instruction systems, really serve to promote specific orientations on educational issues.^[4]

National policy actors refer to high-performing PISA countries to "help legitimise and justify their intended reform agenda inside contested national policy debates".^[11] PISA data can be "used to fuel long-standing debates around pre-existing conflicts or rivalries between dissimilar policy options, such as in the French Community of Belgium".^[12] In such instances, PISA assessment data are used selectively: in public discourse governments often only use superficial features of PISA surveys such equally country rankings and not the more than detailed analyses. Rey (2010:145, citing Greger, 2008) notes that often the real results of PISA assessments are ignored every bit policymakers selectively refer to information in gild to legitimise policies introduced for other reasons.^[thirteen]

In addition, PISA'south international comparisons can be used to justify reforms with which the data themselves take no connexion; in Portugal, for instance, PISA information were used to justify new arrangements for teacher assessment (based on inferences that were non justified by the assessments and data themselves); they besides fed the government's soapbox almost the issue of pupils repeating a year, (which, according to research, fails to improve student results).^[xiv] In Finland, the country's PISA results (that are in other countries deemed to be excellent) were used past Ministers to promote new policies for 'gifted' students.^[15] Such uses and interpretations oftentimes presume causal relationships that cannot legitimately be based upon PISA data which would normally require fuller investigation through qualitative in-depth studies and longitudinal surveys based on mixed quantitative and qualitative methods,^[xvi] which politicians are often reluctant to fund.

Recent decades accept witnessed an expansion in the uses of PISA and similar assessments, from assessing students' learning, to connecting "the educational realm (their traditional remit) with the political realm".^[17] This raises the question of whether PISA data are sufficiently robust to bear the weight of the major policy decisions that are being based upon them, for, according to Breakspear, PISA information have "come to increasingly shape, define and evaluate the key goals of the national / federal didactics system".^[7] This implies that those who set the PISA tests – eastward.g. in choosing the content to be assessed and not assessed – are in a position of considerable power to ready the terms of the educational activity debate, and to orient educational reform in many countries around the globe.^[vii]

Framework [edit]

PISA stands in a tradition of international school studies, undertaken since the late 1950s by the International Clan for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). Much of PISA's methodology follows the case of the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS, started in 1995), which in plow was much influenced by the U.S. National Cess of Educational Progress (NAEP). The reading component of PISA is inspired by the IEA's Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS).

PISA aims to test literacy the competence of students in iii fields: reading, mathematics, science on an indefinite scale.^[18]

The PISA mathematics literacy test asks students to utilise their mathematical knowledge to solve problems set in existent-earth contexts. To solve the bug students must activate a number of mathematical competencies besides as a broad range of mathematical content knowledge. TIMSS, on the other hand, measures more traditional classroom content such as an agreement of fractions and decimals and the relationship between them (curriculum attainment). PISA claims to measure education'southward application to real-life issues and lifelong learning (workforce knowledge).

In the reading test, "OECD/PISA does not measure out the extent to which xv-yr-former students are fluent readers or how competent they are at discussion recognition tasks or spelling." Instead, they should be able to "construct, extend and reflect on the meaning of what they have read beyond a broad range of continuous and not-continuous texts."^[nineteen]

PISA also assesses students in innovative domains. In 2012 and 2015 in addition to reading, mathematics and scientific discipline, they were tested in collaborative trouble solving. In 2018 the additional innovative domain was global competence.

Implementation [edit]

PISA is sponsored, governed, and coordinated past the OECD, simply paid for past participating countries.^{[ citation needed ]}

Method of testing [edit]

Sampling [edit]

The students tested by PISA are aged between xv years and 3 months and 16 years and two months at the starting time of the assessment catamenia. The school year pupils are in is not taken into consideration. Just students at school are tested, not dwelling-schoolers. In PISA 2006, yet, several countries as well used a form-based sample of students. This made it possible to study how age and school yr interact.

To fulfill OECD requirements, each land must draw a sample of at least 5,000 students. In small countries like Republic of iceland and Luxembourg, where in that location are fewer than v,000 students per year, an entire age cohort is tested. Some countries used much larger samples than required to allow comparisons betwixt regions.

Test [edit]

PISA exam documents on a school table (Neues Gymnasium, Oldenburg, Deutschland, 2006)

Each student takes a two-hour computer based examination. Part of the exam is multiple-selection and role involves fuller answers. There are 6 and a half hours of assessment material, but each student is not tested on all the parts. Following the cognitive examination, participating students spend nearly i more 60 minutes answering a questionnaire on their background including learning habits, motivation, and family. School directors make full in a questionnaire describing school demographics, funding, etc. In 2012 the participants were, for the first time in the history of big-scale testing and assessments, offered a new type of trouble, i.e. interactive (complex) bug requiring exploration of a novel virtual device.^{[20] [21]}

In selected countries, PISA started experimentation with computer adaptive testing.

National add-ons [edit]

Countries are immune to combine PISA with complementary national tests.

Federal republic of germany does this in a very extensive way: On the day post-obit the international exam, students take a national test called PISA-Eastward (E=Ergänzung=complement). Test items of PISA-E are closer to TIMSS than to PISA. While simply about five,000 German language students participate in the international and the national examination, another 45,000 take the national test but. This large sample is needed to let an analysis past federal states. Following a clash virtually the interpretation of 2006 results, the OECD warned Germany that it might withdraw the correct to use the "PISA" label for national tests.^[22]

Data scaling [edit]

From the start, PISA has been designed with i particular method of data assay in mind. Since students work on different exam booklets, raw scores must be 'scaled' to permit meaningful comparisons. Scores are thus scaled so that the OECD average in each domain (mathematics, reading and science) is 500 and the standard departure is 100.^[23] This is true only for the initial PISA cycle when the scale was first introduced, though, subsequent cycles are linked to the previous cycles through IRT calibration linking methods.^[24]

This generation of proficiency estimates is done using a latent regression extension of the Rasch model, a model of particular response theory (IRT), also known equally workout model or population model. The proficiency estimates are provided in the form of and then-called plausible values, which allow unbiased estimates of differences between groups. The latent regression, together with the use of a Gaussian prior probability distribution of educatee competencies allows estimation of the proficiency distributions of groups of participating students.^[25] The scaling and conditioning procedures are described in nearly identical terms in the Technical Reports of PISA 2000, 2003, 2006. NAEP and TIMSS use similar scaling methods.

Ranking results [edit]

All PISA results are tabulated by country; recent PISA cycles have separate provincial or regional results for some countries. Most public attending concentrates on just one issue: the mean scores of countries and their rankings of countries against one some other. In the official reports, nevertheless, land-by-state rankings are given not as uncomplicated league tables but as cross tables indicating for each pair of countries whether or not mean score differences are statistically pregnant (unlikely to be due to random fluctuations in student sampling or in particular functioning). In favorable cases, a departure of 9 points is sufficient to be considered significant.^{[ citation needed ]}

PISA never combines mathematics, science and reading domain scores into an overall score. However, commentators take sometimes combined exam results from all three domains into an overall country ranking. Such meta-assay is non endorsed by the OECD, although official summaries sometimes use scores from a testing cycle'due south chief domain as a proxy for overall student ability.

PISA 2018 ranking summary [edit]

The results of PISA 2018 were presented on 3 December 2019, which included data for effectually 600,000 participating students in 79 countries and economies, with Mainland china's economic expanse of Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang emerging every bit the top performer in all categories. Note that this does not represent the entirety of mainland China.^[26] Reading results for Spain were non released due to perceived anomalies.^[27]

Mathematics	Science	Reading
1 China (B-South-J-Z)[a] 591 2 Singapore 569 iii Macau 558 4 Hong Kong 551 5 Taiwan 531 half dozen Japan 527 seven South Korea 526 viii Estonia 523 9 Netherlands 519 10 Poland 516 11 Switzerland 515 12 Canada 512 13 Denmark 509 13 Slovenia 509 15 Kingdom of belgium 508 16 Finland 507 17 Sweden 502 17 United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland 502 19 Kingdom of norway 501 xx Frg 500 20 Ireland 500 22 Czech republic 499 22 Austria 499 24 Latvia 496 24 Vietnam 496 26 France 495 26 Republic of iceland 495 28 New Zealand 494 29 Portugal 492 30 Australia 491 31 Russia 488 32 Italian republic 487 33 Slovakia 486 34 Grand duchy of luxembourg 483 35 Republic of lithuania 481 35 Kingdom of spain 481 35 Republic of hungary 481 38 United States 478 39 Belarus 472 39 Malta 472 41 Croatia 464 42 Israel 463 43 Turkey 454 44 Ukraine 453 45 Cyprus 451 45 Greece 451 47 Serbia 448 48 Malaysia 440 49 Albania 437 fifty Bulgaria 436 51 United Arab Emirates 435 52 Brunei 430 52 Montenegro 430 52 Romania 430 55 Kazakhstan 423 56 Moldova 421 57 Azerbaijan 420 58 Thailand 419 59 Uruguay 418 lx Republic of chile 417 61 Qatar 414 62 Mexico 409 63 Republic of bosnia and herzegovina 406 64 Costa Rica 402 65 Jordan 400 65 Republic of peru 400 67 Georgia 398 68 Due north Macedonia 394 69 Lebanon 393 70 Republic of colombia 391 71 Brazil 384 72 Argentina 379 72 Indonesia 379 74 Saudi Arabia 373 75 Morocco 368 76 Kosovo 366 77 Panama 353 77 Philippines 353 79 Dominican Commonwealth 325	i China (B-Due south-J-Z)[a] 590 2 Singapore 551 3 Macau 544 4 Vietnam 543 5 Estonia 530 6 Japan 529 vii Finland 522 8 Southward Korea 519 9 Canada 518 x Hong Kong 517 11 Taiwan 516 12 Poland 511 13 New Zealand 508 14 Slovenia 507 xv United Kingdom 505 xvi Commonwealth of australia 503 16 Federal republic of germany 503 sixteen Netherlands 503 19 United states 502 xx Belgium 499 20 Sweden 499 22 Czech Republic 497 23 Ireland 496 24 Switzerland 495 25 Denmark 493 25 French republic 493 27 Portugal 492 28 Austria 490 28 Kingdom of norway 490 30 Latvia 487 31 Spain 483 32 Lithuania 482 33 Hungary 481 34 Russian federation 478 35 Luxembourg 477 36 Iceland 475 37 Croatia 472 38 Republic of belarus 471 39 Ukraine 469 forty Italia 468 40 Turkey 468 42 Slovakia 464 43 Israel 462 44 Malta 457 45 Hellenic republic 452 46 Chile 444 47 Serbia 440 48 Cyprus 439 49 Malaysia 438 l United Arab Emirates 434 51 Negara brunei darussalam 431 52 Jordan 429 53 Moldova 428 54 Romania 426 54 Thailand 426 54 Uruguay 426 57 Bulgaria 424 58 United mexican states 419 58 Qatar 419 60 Republic of albania 417 61 Republic of costa rica 416 62 Montenegro 415 63 Colombia 413 63 Due north Macedonia 413 65 Argentina 404 65 Brazil 404 65 Peru 404 68 Azerbaijan 398 68 Republic of bosnia and herzegovina 398 70 Kazakhstan 397 71 Indonesia 396 72 Kingdom of saudi arabia 386 73 Lebanese republic 384 74 Georgia 383 75 Kingdom of morocco 377 76 Kosovo 365 76 Panama 365 78 Philippines 357 79 Dominican Republic 336	1 China (B-South-J-Z)[a] 555 two Singapore 549 3 Macau 525 4 Hong Kong 524 5 Republic of estonia 523 6 Canada 520 half dozen Republic of finland 520 8 Ireland 518 9 South Korea 514 10 Poland 512 eleven New Zealand 506 11 Sweden 506 13 The states 505 xv Japan 504 15 United kingdom 504 17 Australia 503 17 Taiwan 503 19 Denmark 501 20 Norway 499 21 Germany 498 22 Slovenia 495 23 Kingdom of belgium 493 23 France 493 25 Portugal 492 26 Czech republic 490 27 Netherlands 485 28 Austria 484 28 Switzerland 484 xxx Croatia 479 30 Latvia 479 30 Russia 479 33 Hungary 476 33 Italy 476 33 Lithuania 476 36 Republic of belarus 474 36 Iceland 474 38 Israel 470 38 Luxembourg 470 40 Turkey 466 40 Ukraine 466 42 Slovakia 458 43 Greece 457 44 Chile 452 45 Republic of malta 448 46 Serbia 439 47 United Arab Emirates 432 48 Romania 428 49 Uruguay 427 l Costa Rica 426 51 Cyprus 424 51 Moldova 424 53 Montenegro 421 54 Republic of bulgaria 420 54 Mexico 420 56 Jordan 419 57 Malaysia 415 58 Brazil 413 59 Colombia 412 60 Brunei 408 61 Qatar 407 62 Republic of albania 405 63 Republic of bosnia and herzegovina 403 64 Argentine republic 402 65 Peru 401 66 Saudi arabia 399 67 Due north Macedonia 393 67 Thailand 393 69 Republic of azerbaijan 389 70 Kazakhstan 387 71 Georgia 380 72 Panama 377 73 Indonesia 371 74 Morocco 359 75 Kosovo 353 75 Lebanese republic 353 77 Dominican Republic 342 78 Philippines 340

Rankings comparison 2003–2015 [edit]

Mathematics
Country	2015		2012		2009		2006		2003
	Score	Rank	Score	Rank	Score	Rank	Score	Rank	Score	Rank
International Average (OECD)	490	—	494	—	495	—	494	—	499	—
Albania	413	57	394	54	377	53	—	—	—	—
Algeria	360	72	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Argentina	409	58	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Australia	494	25	504	17	514	13	520	12	524	10
Republic of austria	497	20	506	sixteen	496	22	505	17	506	18
Cathay B-S-J-G[b]	531	six	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Belgium	507	xv	515	13	515	12	520	11	529	7
Brazil	377	68	389	55	386	51	370	l	356	39
Bulgaria	441	47	439	43	428	41	413	43	—	—
Argentina CABA[c]	456	43	418	49	—	—	—	—	—	—
Canada	516	10	518	eleven	527	8	527	seven	532	6
Chile	423	fifty	423	47	421	44	411	44	—	—
Taiwan	542	four	560	three	543	4	549	ane	—	—
Republic of colombia	390	64	376	58	381	52	370	49	—	—
Costa Rica	400	62	407	53	—	—	—	—	—	—
Croatia	464	41	471	38	460	38	467	34	—	—
Cyprus	437	48	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Czech Republic	492	28	499	22	493	25	510	xv	516	12
Kingdom of denmark	511	12	500	20	503	17	513	xiv	514	fourteen
Dominican Republic	328	73	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Estonia	520	ix	521	ix	512	15	515	thirteen	—	—
Finland	511	13	519	10	541	5	548	two	544	two
France	493	26	495	23	497	20	496	22	511	xv
Macedonia	371	69	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Georgia	404	60	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Deutschland	506	16	514	14	513	14	504	19	503	19
Hellenic republic	454	44	453	40	466	37	459	37	445	32
Hong Kong	548	2	561	ii	555	2	547	iii	550	i
Hungary	477	37	477	37	490	27	491	26	490	25
Republic of iceland	488	31	493	25	507	xvi	506	xvi	515	thirteen
Republic of indonesia	386	66	375	sixty	371	55	391	47	360	37
Ireland	504	18	501	18	487	30	501	21	503	20
Israel	470	39	466	39	447	39	442	38	—	—
Italia	490	30	485	30	483	33	462	36	466	31
Japan	532	five	536	6	529	7	523	ix	534	5
Jordan	380	67	386	57	387	fifty	384	48	—	—
Kazakhstan	460	42	432	45	405	48	—	—	—	—
South korea	524	7	554	four	546	iii	547	iv	542	3
Kosovo	362	71	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Latvia	482	34	491	26	482	34	486	30	483	27
Lebanese republic	396	63	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Lithuania	478	36	479	35	477	35	486	29	—	—
Grand duchy of luxembourg	486	33	490	27	489	28	490	27	493	23
Macau	544	three	538	5	525	10	525	8	527	8
Malaysia	446	45	421	48	—	—	—	—	—	—
Malta	479	35	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Mexico	408	59	413	50	419	46	406	45	385	36
Moldova	420	52	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Montenegro	418	54	410	51	403	49	399	46	—	—
Netherlands	512	11	523	8	526	9	531	5	538	4
New Zealand	495	21	500	21	519	11	522	10	523	xi
Norway	502	19	489	28	498	19	490	28	495	22
Peru	387	65	368	61	365	57	—	—	—	—
Poland	504	17	518	12	495	23	495	24	490	24
Portugal	492	29	487	29	487	31	466	35	466	thirty
Qatar	402	61	376	59	368	56	318	52	—	—
Romania	444	46	445	42	427	42	415	42	—	—
Russia	494	23	482	32	468	36	476	32	468	29
Singapore	564	1	573	1	562	i	—	—	—	—
Slovakia	475	38	482	33	497	21	492	25	498	21
Slovenia	510	14	501	19	501	18	504	eighteen	—	—
Spain	486	32	484	31	483	32	480	31	485	26
Sweden	494	24	478	36	494	24	502	20	509	xvi
Switzerland	521	eight	531	7	534	6	530	6	527	9
Thailand	415	56	427	46	419	45	417	41	417	35
Trinidad and Tobago	417	55	—	—	414	47	—	—	—	—
Tunisia	367	70	388	56	371	54	365	51	359	38
Turkey	420	51	448	41	445	xl	424	40	423	33
United Arab Emirates	427	49	434	44	—	—	—	—	—	—
Great britain	492	27	494	24	492	26	495	23	508	17
United states	470	40	481	34	487	29	474	33	483	28
Uruguay	418	53	409	52	427	43	427	39	422	34
Vietnam	495	22	511	15	—	—	—	—	—	—

Scientific discipline
Country	2015		2012		2009		2006
	Score	Rank	Score	Rank	Score	Rank	Score	Rank
International Average (OECD)	493	—	501	—	501	—	498	—
Albania	427	54	397	58	391	54	—	—
People's democratic republic of algeria	376	72	—	—	—	—	—	—
Argentina	432	52	—	—	—	—	—	—
Australia	510	14	521	14	527	9	527	8
Austria	495	26	506	21	494	28	511	17
Communist china B-S-J-Chiliad[b]	518	ten	—	—	—	—	—	—
Kingdom of belgium	502	20	505	22	507	nineteen	510	18
Brazil	401	66	402	55	405	49	390	49
Republic of bulgaria	446	46	446	43	439	42	434	40
Argentine republic CABA[c]	475	38	425	49	—	—	—	—
Canada	528	7	525	9	529	vii	534	three
Chile	447	45	445	44	447	41	438	39
Taiwan	532	4	523	11	520	11	532	4
Colombia	416	sixty	399	56	402	l	388	fifty
Republic of costa rica	420	58	429	47	—	—	—	—
Croatia	475	37	491	32	486	35	493	25
Cyprus	433	51	—	—	—	—	—	—
Czech Republic	493	29	508	20	500	22	513	14
Kingdom of denmark	502	21	498	25	499	24	496	23
Dominican Commonwealth	332	73	—	—	—	—	—	—
Republic of estonia	534	3	541	v	528	8	531	5
Finland	531	5	545	four	554	one	563	1
France	495	27	499	24	498	25	495	24
Macedonia	384	70	—	—	—	—	—	—
Georgia	411	63	—	—	—	—	—	—
Deutschland	509	16	524	10	520	12	516	12
Greece	455	44	467	40	470	38	473	37
Hong Kong	523	ix	555	1	549	2	542	2
Hungary	477	35	494	30	503	xx	504	xx
Republic of iceland	473	39	478	37	496	26	491	26
Indonesia	403	65	382	60	383	55	393	48
Ireland	503	19	522	thirteen	508	eighteen	508	xix
Israel	467	forty	470	39	455	39	454	38
Italy	481	34	494	31	489	33	475	35
Japan	538	two	547	three	539	iv	531	6
Jordan	409	64	409	54	415	47	422	43
Kazakhstan	456	43	425	48	400	53	—	—
Due south Korea	516	eleven	538	half-dozen	538	five	522	10
Kosovo	378	71	—	—	—	—	—	—
Republic of latvia	490	31	502	23	494	29	490	27
Lebanese republic	386	68	—	—	—	—	—	—
Lithuania	475	36	496	28	491	31	488	31
Luxembourg	483	33	491	33	484	36	486	33
Macau	529	six	521	15	511	16	511	16
Malaysia	443	47	420	50	—	—	—	—
Malta	465	41	—	—	—	—	—	—
Mexico	416	61	415	52	416	46	410	47
Moldova	428	53	—	—	—	—	—	—
Montenegro	411	62	410	53	401	51	412	46
Netherlands	509	17	522	12	522	ten	525	9
New Zealand	513	12	516	xvi	532	vi	530	7
Kingdom of norway	498	24	495	29	500	23	487	32
Peru	397	67	373	61	369	57	—	—
Poland	501	22	526	8	508	17	498	22
Portugal	501	23	489	34	493	xxx	474	36
Qatar	418	59	384	59	379	56	349	52
Romania	435	50	439	46	428	43	418	45
Russia	487	32	486	35	478	37	479	34
Singapore	556	1	551	2	542	iii	—	—
Slovakia	461	42	471	38	490	32	488	29
Slovenia	513	13	514	18	512	15	519	11
Kingdom of spain	493	30	496	27	488	34	488	30
Sweden	493	28	485	36	495	27	503	21
Switzerland	506	xviii	515	17	517	13	512	xv
Thailand	421	57	444	45	425	45	421	44
Trinidad and Tobago	425	56	—	—	410	48	—	—
Tunisia	386	69	398	57	401	52	386	51
Turkey	425	55	463	41	454	40	424	42
United Arab Emirates	437	48	448	42	—	—	—	—
United Kingdom	509	15	514	19	514	xiv	515	thirteen
United States	496	25	497	26	502	21	489	28
Uruguay	435	49	416	51	427	44	428	41
Vietnam	525	8	528	7	—	—	—	—

Reading
Country	2015		2012		2009		2006		2003		2000
	Score	Rank	Score	Rank	Score	Rank	Score	Rank	Score	Rank	Score	Rank
International Average (OECD)	493	—	496	—	493	—	489	—	494	—	493	—
Albania	405	63	394	58	385	55	—	—	—	—	349	39
Algeria	350	71	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Argentina	425	56	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Australia	503	16	512	12	515	8	513	7	525	4	528	iv
Austria	485	33	490	26	470	37	490	21	491	22	492	19
China B-Southward-J-G[b]	494	27	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Belgium	499	twenty	509	16	506	10	501	xi	507	eleven	507	eleven
Brazil	407	62	407	52	412	49	393	47	403	36	396	36
Bulgaria	432	49	436	47	429	42	402	43	—	—	430	32
Argentina CABA[c]	475	38	429	48	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Canada	527	iii	523	vii	524	v	527	iv	528	3	534	ii
Chile	459	42	441	43	449	41	442	37	—	—	410	35
Taiwan	497	23	523	eight	495	21	496	15	—	—	—	—
Colombia	425	57	403	54	413	48	385	49	—	—	—	—
Costa Rica	427	52	441	45	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Croatia	487	31	485	33	476	34	477	29	—	—	—	—
Cyprus	443	45	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Czech Republic	487	30	493	24	478	32	483	25	489	24	492	twenty
Denmark	500	18	496	23	495	22	494	18	492	19	497	16
Dominican Democracy	358	69	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Estonia	519	6	516	10	501	12	501	12	—	—	—	—
Republic of finland	526	4	524	five	536	2	547	2	543	1	546	one
French republic	499	19	505	19	496	20	488	22	496	17	505	14
Macedonia	352	70	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	373	37
Georgia	401	65	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Frg	509	xi	508	18	497	18	495	17	491	21	484	22
Greece	467	41	477	38	483	30	460	35	472	30	474	25
Hong Kong	527	2	545	ane	533	3	536	3	510	9	525	six
Hungary	470	forty	488	28	494	24	482	26	482	25	480	23
Iceland	482	35	483	35	500	15	484	23	492	xx	507	12
Indonesia	397	67	396	57	402	53	393	46	382	38	371	38
Ireland	521	5	523	6	496	nineteen	517	6	515	6	527	v
Israel	479	37	486	32	474	35	439	39	—	—	452	29
Italian republic	485	34	490	25	486	27	469	32	476	29	487	21
Japan	516	8	538	3	520	7	498	fourteen	498	fourteen	522	9
Hashemite kingdom of jordan	408	61	399	55	405	51	401	44	—	—	—	—
Kazakhstan	427	54	393	59	390	54	—	—	—	—	—	—
Due south Korea	517	7	536	four	539	1	556	ane	534	2	525	7
Kosovo	347	72	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Latvia	488	29	489	27	484	28	479	27	491	23	458	28
Lebanon	347	73	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Lithuania	472	39	477	37	468	38	470	31	—	—	—	—
Grand duchy of luxembourg	481	36	488	30	472	36	479	28	479	27	441	30
Macau	509	12	509	fifteen	487	26	492	twenty	498	fifteen	—	—
Malaysia	431	50	398	56	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Malta	447	44	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
United mexican states	423	58	424	49	425	44	410	42	400	37	422	34
Moldova	416	59	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Montenegro	427	55	422	50	408	50	392	48	—	—	—	—
Netherlands	503	15	511	thirteen	508	9	507	10	513	8	‡	‡
New Zealand	509	ten	512	11	521	six	521	5	522	v	529	3
Norway	513	nine	504	twenty	503	eleven	484	24	500	12	505	xiii
Republic of peru	398	66	384	61	370	57	—	—	—	—	327	40
Poland	506	thirteen	518	nine	500	14	508	8	497	16	479	24
Portugal	498	21	488	31	489	25	472	30	478	28	470	26
Qatar	402	64	388	60	372	56	312	51	—	—	—	—
Romania	434	47	438	46	424	45	396	45	—	—	428	33
Russia	495	26	475	40	459	40	440	38	442	32	462	27
Singapore	535	1	542	two	526	4	—	—	—	—	—	—
Slovakia	453	43	463	41	477	33	466	33	469	31	—	—
Slovenia	505	14	481	36	483	29	494	nineteen	—	—	—	—
Kingdom of spain	496	25	488	29	481	31	461	34	481	26	493	xviii
Sweden	500	17	483	34	497	17	507	9	514	vii	516	10
Switzerland	492	28	509	14	501	13	499	13	499	13	494	17
Thailand	409	60	441	44	421	46	417	40	420	35	431	31
Trinidad and Tobago	427	53	—	—	416	47	—	—	—	—	—	—
Tunisia	361	68	404	53	404	52	380	50	375	39	—	—
Turkey	428	51	475	39	464	39	447	36	441	33	—	—
United Arab Emirates	434	48	442	42	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
United Kingdom	498	22	499	21	494	23	495	xvi	507	ten	523	8
The states	497	24	498	22	500	xvi	—	—	495	18	504	15
Uruguay	437	46	411	51	426	43	413	41	434	34	—	—
Vietnam	487	32	508	17	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—

1. ^ ^{a b c} Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang
2. ^ ^{a b c} Shanghai (2009, 2012); Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Guangdong (2015)
3. ^ ^{a b c} Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires

Previous years [edit]

Menstruation	Focus	OECD countries	Partner countries	Participating students	Notes
2000	Reading	28	4 + 11	265,000	The netherlands butterfingers from data analysis. 11 additional not-OECD countries took the test in 2002.
2003	Mathematics	xxx	11	275,000	UK disqualified from data analysis. Also included test in problem solving.
2006	Science	thirty	27	400,000	Reading scores for US disqualified from analysis due to misprint in testing materials.[28]
2009[29]	Reading	34	41 + 10	470,000	10 additional non-OECD countries took the test in 2010.[thirty] [31]
2012[32]	Mathematics	34	31	510,000

Reception [edit]

(Prc) China'south participation in the 2012 test was limited to Shanghai, Hong Kong, and Macau as separate entities. In 2012, Shanghai participated for the second time, again topping the rankings in all three subjects, as well as improving scores in the subjects compared to the 2009 tests. Shanghai's score of 613 in mathematics was 113 points above the average score, putting the performance of Shanghai pupils nigh three school years alee of pupils in average countries. Educational experts debated to what caste this result reflected the quality of the full general educational system in China, pointing out that Shanghai has greater wealth and better-paid teachers than the balance of China.^[33] Hong Kong placed second in reading and scientific discipline and third in maths.

Andreas Schleicher, PISA division head and co-ordinator, stated that PISA tests administered in rural China have produced some results approaching the OECD average. Citing farther as-yet-unpublished OECD inquiry, he said, "We take actually done Pisa in 12 of the provinces in China. Fifty-fifty in some of the very poor areas you get performance shut to the OECD average."^[34] Schleicher believes that China has also expanded school admission and has moved away from learning by rote,^[35] performing well in both rote-based and broader assessments.^[34]

In 2018 the Chinese provinces that participated were Beijing, Shanghai, Jiangsu and Zhejiang. In 2015, the participating provinces were Jiangsu, Guangdong, Beijing, and Shanghai.^[36] The 2015 Beijing-Shanghai-Jiangsu-Guangdong cohort scored a median 518 in science in 2015, while the 2012 Shanghai cohort scored a median 580.

Critics of PISA counter that in Shanghai and other Chinese cities, most children of migrant workers can but attend metropolis schools up to the 9th course, and must render to their parents' hometowns for high schoolhouse due to hukou restrictions, thus skewing the limerick of the city'due south high school students in favor of wealthier local families. A population chart of Shanghai reproduced in The New York Times shows a steep drop off in the number of 15-yr-olds residing in that location.^[37] According to Schleicher, 27% of Shanghai's 15-year-olds are excluded from its school organization (and hence from testing). As a result, the per centum of Shanghai's 15-year-olds tested by PISA was 73%, lower than the 89% tested in the US.^[38] Following the 2015 testing, OECD published in depth studies on the education systems of a selected few countries including Communist china.^[39]

In 2014, Liz Truss, the British Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Department for Education, led a fact-finding visit to schools and teacher-training centres in Shanghai.^[forty] Great britain increased exchanges with Chinese teachers and schools to detect out how to improve quality. In 2014, 60 teachers from Shanghai were invited to the United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland to assist share their teaching methods, back up pupils who are struggling, and help to railroad train other teachers.^[41] In 2016, Uk invited 120 Chinese teachers, planning to adopt Chinese styles of teaching in eight,000 aided schools.^[42] By 2019, approximately v,000 of Britain'due south sixteen,000 primary schools had adopted the Shanghai's educational activity methods.^[43] The operation of British schools in PISA improved after adopting China's teaching styles.^{[44] [45]}

Finland [edit]

Republic of finland, which received several superlative positions in the commencement tests, brutal in all three subjects in 2012, but remained the best performing land overall in Europe, achieving their all-time result in scientific discipline with 545 points (fifth) and worst in mathematics with 519 (12th) in which the land was outperformed by four other European countries. The drop in mathematics was 25 points since 2003, the last fourth dimension mathematics was the focus of the tests. For the first time Finnish girls outperformed boys in mathematics narrowly. It was also the first time pupils in Finnish-speaking schools did not perform ameliorate than pupils in Swedish-speaking schools. Minister of Instruction and Science Krista Kiuru expressed concern for the overall drop, too as the fact that the number of low-performers had increased from 7% to 12%.^[46]

India [edit]

India participated in the 2009 round of testing merely pulled out of the 2012 PISA testing, with the Indian regime attributing its action to the unfairness of PISA testing to Indian students.^[47] The Indian Express reported, "The ministry (of education) has concluded that there was a socio-cultural disconnect betwixt the questions and Indian students. The ministry will write to the OECD and drive home the need to factor in India's "socio-cultural milieu". India's participation in the side by side PISA cycle will swivel on this".^[48] The Indian Limited also noted that "Because that over 70 nations participate in PISA, it is uncertain whether an exception would exist fabricated for India".

India did non participate in the 2012, 2015 and 2018 PISA rounds.^[49]

A Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) commission every bit well as a grouping of secretaries on educational activity constituted by the Prime number Government minister of India Narendra Modi recommended that Republic of india should participate in PISA. Accordingly, in February 2017, the Ministry of Human Resource Development under Prakash Javadekar decided to end the boycott and participate in PISA from 2020. To address the socio-cultural disconnect betwixt the test questions and students, it was reported that the OECD volition update some questions. For case, the word avocado in a question may be replaced with a more than popular Indian fruit such equally mango.^[fifty]

Malaysia [edit]

In 2015, the results from Malaysia were constitute by the OECD to have not met the maximum response charge per unit.^[51] Opposition politician Ong Kian Ming said the education ministry building tried to oversample loftier-performing students in rich schools.^{[52] [53]}

Sweden [edit]

Sweden'southward consequence dropped in all three subjects in the 2012 exam, which was a continuation of a tendency from 2006 and 2009. It saw the sharpest fall in mathematics functioning with a drop in score from 509 in 2003 to 478 in 2012. The score in reading showed a drop from 516 in 2000 to 483 in 2012. The country performed beneath the OECD average in all three subjects.^[54] The leader of the opposition, Social Democrat Stefan Löfven, described the situation as a national crisis.^[55] Forth with the party'due south spokesperson on educational activity, Ibrahim Baylan, he pointed to the downward trend in reading equally nearly severe.^[55]

In 2020, Swedish paper Expressen revealed that Sweden had inflated their score in PISA 2018 past not befitting to OECD standards. According to professor Magnus Henrekson a large number of foreign-built-in students had not been tested.^[56]

United Kingdom [edit]

In the 2012 examination, as in 2009, the result was slightly higher up average for the U.k., with the science ranking beingness highest (20).^[57] England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Republic of ireland also participated every bit separated entities, showing the worst upshot for Wales which in mathematics was 43rd of the 65 countries and economies. Minister of Education in Wales Huw Lewis expressed disappointment in the results, said that in that location were no "quick fixes", but hoped that several educational reforms that take been implemented in the last few years would give ameliorate results in the next round of tests.^[58] The United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland had a greater gap between high- and low-scoring students than the average. There was little difference between public and private schools when adjusted for socio-economic background of students. The gender difference in favour of girls was less than in most other countries, equally was the difference between natives and immigrants.^[57]

Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard warned confronting putting too much emphasis on the United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland'due south international ranking, arguing that an overfocus on scholarly performances in East Asia might have contributed to the area'south low birthrate, which he argued could damage the economic performance in the future more a skillful PISA score would outweigh.^[59]

In 2013, the Times Educational Supplement (TES) published an article, "Is PISA Fundamentally Flawed?" past William Stewart, detailing serious critiques of PISA'southward conceptual foundations and methods advanced by statisticians at major universities.^[sixty]

In the article, Professor Harvey Goldstein of the Academy of Bristol was quoted as maxim that when the OECD tries to dominion out questions suspected of bias, information technology can accept the consequence of "smoothing out" key differences between countries. "That is leaving out many of the important things," he warned. "They merely don't get commented on. What yous are looking at is something that happens to be common. But (is information technology) worth looking at? PISA results are taken at face value every bit providing some sort of common standard across countries. Merely as soon equally yous brainstorm to unpick it, I think that all falls apart."

Queen's Academy Belfast mathematician Dr. Hugh Morrison stated that he found the statistical model underlying PISA to contain a primal, insoluble mathematical error that renders Pisa rankings "valueless".^[61] Goldstein remarked that Dr. Morrison'due south objection highlights "an important technical issue" if not a "profound conceptual error". However, Goldstein cautioned that PISA has been "used inappropriately", contending that some of the blame for this "lies with PISA itself. I recall it tends to say as well much for what information technology can do and it tends not to publicise the negative or the weaker aspects." Professors Morrison and Goldstein expressed dismay at the OECD's response to criticism. Morrison said that when he first published his criticisms of PISA in 2004 and as well personally queried several of the OECD'south "senior people" almost them, his points were met with "absolute silence" and have all the same to be addressed. "I was amazed at how unforthcoming they were," he told TES. "That makes me suspicious." "Pisa steadfastly ignored many of these bug," he says. "I am still concerned."^[62]

Professor Svend Kreiner, of the University of Copenhagen, agreed: "One of the problems that everybody has with PISA is that they don't want to discuss things with people criticising or asking questions concerning the results. They didn't desire to talk to me at all. I am sure information technology is considering they can't defend themselves.^[62]

United States [edit]

Since 2012 a few states have participated in the PISA tests as separate entities. Simply the 2012 and 2015 results are available on a state basis. Puerto Rico participated in 2015 as a separate Usa entity as well.

2012 US Land results

Mathematics	Science	Reading
Massachusetts 514 Connecticut 506 U.s.a. Average 481 Florida 467	Massachusetts 527 Connecticut 521 US Average 497 Florida 485	Massachusetts 527 Connecticut 521 US Average 498 Florida 492

2015 US State results

Mathematics	Science	Reading
Massachusetts 500 North Carolina 471 US Average 470 Puerto Rico 378	Massachusetts 529 North Carolina 502 U.s. Average 496 Puerto Rico 403	Massachusetts 527 North Carolina 500 The states Average 497 Puerto Rico 410

PISA results for the United States by race and ethnicity.

Mathematics
Race	2018[63]	2015	2012	2009	2006	2003
	Score	Score	Score	Score	Score	Score
Asian	539	498	549	524	494	506
White	503	499	506	515	502	512
United states of america Average	478	470	481	487	474	483
More than than one race	474	475	492	487	482	502
Hispanic	452	446	455	453	436	443
Other	—	423	436	460	446	446
Black	419	419	421	423	404	417

Science
Race	2018[63]	2015	2012	2009	2006
	Score	Score	Score	Score	Score
Asian	551	525	546	536	499
White	529	531	528	532	523
US Average	502	496	497	502	489
More one race	502	503	511	503	501
Hispanic	478	470	462	464	439
Other	—	462	439	465	453
Blackness	440	433	439	435	409

Reading
Race	2018[63]	2015	2012	2009	2006	2003	2000
	Score	Score	Score	Score	Score	Score	Score
Asian	556	527	550	541	—	513	546
White	531	526	519	525	—	525	538
United states of america Average	505	497	498	500	—	495	504
More than than 1 race	501	498	517	502	—	515	—
Hispanic	481	478	478	466	—	453	449
Black	448	443	443	441	—	430	445
Other	—	440	438	462	—	456	455

Research on possible causes of PISA disparities in different countries [edit]

Although PISA and TIMSS officials and researchers themselves mostly refrain from hypothesizing near the large and stable differences in pupil accomplishment between countries, since 2000, literature on the differences in PISA and TIMSS results and their possible causes has emerged.^[64] Data from PISA have furnished several researchers, notably Eric Hanushek, Ludger Wößmann, Heiner Rindermann, and Stephen J. Ceci, with fabric for books and articles nearly the relationship between pupil achievement and economic development,^[65] democratization, and health;^[66] as well as the roles of such single educational factors equally high-stakes exams,^[67] the presence or absenteeism of private schools and the effects and timing of power tracking.^[68]

[edit]

David Spiegelhalter of Cambridge wrote: "Pisa does nowadays the uncertainty in the scores and ranks - for example the United Kingdom rank in the 65 countries is said to be between 23 and 31. It's unwise for countries to base education policy on their Pisa results, as Frg, Norway and Denmark did later doing badly in 2001."^[69]

Co-ordinate to a Forbes opinion article, some countries such as Red china, Hong Kong, Macau, and Argentina select PISA samples from only the best-educated areas or from their top-performing students, slanting the results.^[seventy]

According to an open letter to Andreas Schleicher, director of PISA, various academics and educators argued that "OECD and Pisa tests are dissentious teaching worldwide".^[71]

According to O Estado de São Paulo, Brazil shows a great disparity when classifying the results between public and private schools, where public schools would rank worse than Peru, while individual schools would rank ameliorate than Republic of finland.^[72]

See besides [edit]

• Gender gaps in mathematics and reading in PISA 2009
• Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS)
• Teaching And Learning International Survey (TALIS)
• Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS)

Explanatory notes [edit]

References [edit]

1. ^ "About PISA". OECD PISA . Retrieved eight February 2018.
2. ^ Berger, Kathleen (iii March 2014). Invitation to The Life Bridge (second ed.). worth. ISBN978-1-4641-7205-2.
3. ^ "PISA 2018 Results". OECD. iii December 2019. Archived from the original on 3 Dec 2019. Retrieved 3 December 2019.
4. ^ ^{a b c d e} "Rey O, 'The utilise of external assessments and the impact on educational activity systems' in CIDREE Yearbook 2010, accessed January 2017". Archived from the original on 3 Feb 2017. Retrieved 22 November 2019.
5. ^ McGaw, B (2008) 'The role of the OECD in international comparative studies of achievement' Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 15:3, 223–243
6. ^ Mons N, (2008) 'Évaluation des politiques éducatives et comparaisons internationales', Revue française de pédagogie, 164, juillet-août-septembre 2008 5–13
7. ^ ^{a b c d e f} Breakspear, Due south. (2012). "The Policy Impact of PISA: An Exploration of the Normative Effects of International Benchmarking in Schoolhouse System Performance". OECD Education Working Paper. OECD Education Working Papers. 71. doi:x.1787/5k9fdfqffr28-en.
8. ^ Barroso, J. and de Carvalho, L.G. (2008) 'Pisa: Un musical instrument de régulation pour relier des mondes', Revue française de pédagogie, 164, 77–80
9. ^ Ertl, H. (2006). "Educational standards and the irresolute soapbox on didactics: the reception and consequences of the PISA report in Deutschland". Oxford Review of Education. 32 (five): 619–634. doi:10.1080/03054980600976320. S2CID 144656964.
10. ^ Bajomi, I., Berényi, E., Neumann, E. and Vida, J. (2009). 'The Reception of PISA in Republic of hungary' accessed Jan 2017
11. ^ Steiner-Khamsi (2003), cited by Breakspear, South. (2012). "The Policy Bear on of PISA: An Exploration of the Normative Effects of International Benchmarking in School Organization Functioning". OECD Education Working Paper. OECD Instruction Working Papers. 71. doi:ten.1787/5k9fdfqffr28-en.
12. ^ Mangez, Eric; Cattonar, Branka (September–December 2009). "The status of PISA in the relationship between ceremonious society and the educational sector in French-speaking Belgium". Sísifo: Educational Sciences Periodical. Educational Sciences R&D Unit of the Academy of Lisbon (x): 15–26. ISSN 1646-6500. Retrieved 26 December 2017.
13. ^ "Greger, D. (2008). 'Lorsque PISA importe peu. Le cas de la République Tchèque et de l'Allemagne', Revue française de pédagogie, 164, 91–98. cited in Rey O, 'The use of external assessments and the impact on education systems' in CIDREE Yearbook 2010, accessed Jan 2017". Archived from the original on three February 2017. Retrieved 22 November 2019.
14. ^ Afonso, Natércio; Costa, Estela (September–December 2009). "The influence of the Programme for International Educatee Assessment (PISA) on policy determination in Portugal: the education policies of the 17th Portuguese Constitutional Regime" (PDF). Sísifo: Educational Sciences Periodical. Educational Sciences R&D Unit of the University of Lisbon (x): 53–64. ISSN 1646-6500. Retrieved 26 December 2017.
15. ^ Rautalin, Yard.; Alasuutari (2009). "The uses of the national PISA results by Finnish officials in cardinal government". Journal of Education Policy. 24 (5): 539–556. doi:10.1080/02680930903131267. S2CID 154584726.
16. ^ Egelund, Northward. (2008). 'The value of international comparative studies of achievement – a Danish perspective', Cess in Education: Principles, Policy & Exercise, 15, 3, 245–251
17. ^ "Behrens, 2006 cited in Rey O, 'The use of external assessments and the impact on education systems in CIDREE Yearbook 2010, accessed Jan 2017". Archived from the original on 3 Feb 2017. Retrieved 22 Nov 2019.
18. ^ Hefling, Kimberly. "Asian nations dominate international examination". Yahoo!.
19. ^ "Affiliate 2 of the publication 'PISA 2003 Assessment Framework'" (PDF). Pisa.oecd.org.
20. ^ Keeley B. PISA, we have a problem… OECD Insights, April 2014.
21. ^ Poddiakov, Alexander Circuitous Problem Solving at PISA 2012 and PISA 2015: Interaction with Circuitous Reality. // Translated from Russian. Reference to the original Russian text: Poddiakov, A. (2012.) Reshenie kompleksnykh problem v PISA-2012 i PISA-2015: vzaimodeistvie so slozhnoi real'nost'yu. Obrazovatel'naya Politika, half-dozen, 34–53.
22. ^ C. Füller: Pisa hat einen kleinen, fröhlichen Bruder. taz, v.12.2007 [one]
23. ^ Stanat, P; Artelt, C; Baumert, J; Klieme, Due east; Neubrand, M; Prenzel, G; Schiefele, U; Schneider, W (2002), PISA 2000: Overview of the study—Design, method and results, Berlin: Max Planck Establish for Human Development
24. ^ Mazzeo, John; von Davier, Matthias (2013), Linking Scales in International Large-Calibration Assessments, chapter ten in Rutkowski, L. von Davier, Thousand. & Rutkowski, D. (eds.) Handbook of International Large-Scale Cess: Background, Technical Issues, and Methods of Information Analysis., New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
25. ^ von Davier, Matthias; Sinharay, Sandip (2013), Analytics in International Big-Scale Assessments: Item Response Theory and Population Models, chapter seven in Rutkowski, L. von Davier, 1000. & Rutkowski, D. (eds.) Handbook of International Big-Scale Assessment: Background, Technical Problems, and Methods of Data Assay., New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
26. ^ PISA 2018: Insights and Interpretations (PDF), OECD, 3 Dec 2019, retrieved 4 Dec 2019
27. ^ PISA 2018 in Espana (PDF), OECD, fifteen November 2019, retrieved 28 February 2021
28. ^ Baldi, Stéphane; Jin, Ying; Skemer, Melanie; Green, Patricia J; Herget, Deborah; Xie, Holly (10 December 2007), Highlights From PISA 2006: Performance of U.S. 15-Year-Old Students in Science and Mathematics Literacy in an International Context (PDF), NCES, retrieved 14 December 2013, PISA 2006 reading literacy results are not reported for the United states of america because of an error in press the examination booklets. Furthermore, equally a result of the printing error, the hateful performance in mathematics and science may be misestimated past approximately 1 score bespeak. The bear on is beneath i standard error.
29. ^ PISA 2009 Results: Executive Summary (PDF), OECD, 7 December 2010
30. ^ ACER releases results of PISA 2009+ participant economies, ACER, 16 Dec 2011, archived from the original on 14 Dec 2013
31. ^ Walker, Maurice (2011), PISA 2009 Plus Results (PDF), OECD, archived from the original (PDF) on 22 December 2011, retrieved 28 June 2012
32. ^ PISA 2012 Results in Focus (PDF), OECD, iii December 2013, retrieved 4 December 2013
33. ^ Tom Phillips (three December 2013) OECD didactics report: Shanghai's formula is world-beating The Telegraph. Retrieved viii December 2013
34. ^ ^{a b} Cook, Chris (7 December 2010), "Shanghai tops global state school rankings", Fiscal Times , retrieved 28 June 2012
35. ^ Mance, Henry (7 December 2010), "Why are Chinese schoolkids so good?", Financial Times , retrieved 28 June 2012
36. ^ Coughlan, Sean (26 August 2014). "Pisa tests to include many more Chinese pupils". BBC News.
37. ^ Helen Gao, "Shanghai Examination Scores and the Mystery of the Missing Children", New York Times, January 23, 2014. For Schleicher'south initial response to these criticisms see his mail, "Are the Chinese Adulterous in PISA Or Are Nosotros Adulterous Ourselves?" on the OECD'south website weblog, Didactics Today, December x, 2013.
38. ^ "William Stewart, "More than than a quarter of Shanghai pupils missed past international Pisa rankings", Times Educational Supplement, March 6, 2014". Archived from the original on 15 March 2014. Retrieved 7 March 2014.
39. ^ http://www.oecd.org/china/Pedagogy-in-Red china-a-snapshot.pdf^{[ blank URL PDF ]}
40. ^ Howse, Patrick (eighteen February 2014). "Shanghai visit for government minister to larn maths lessons". BBC News . Retrieved 19 July 2014.
41. ^ Coughlan, Sean (12 March 2014). "Shanghai teachers flown in for maths". BBC News . Retrieved xi August 2020.
42. ^ "Britain invites 120 Chinese Maths teachers for aided schools". India Today. 20 July 2016. Retrieved 12 August 2020.
43. ^ "Scores eternalize case for Shanghai math in British schools | The Star". www.thestar.com.my . Retrieved 11 August 2020.
44. ^ Turner, Camilla (iii December 2019). "Britain jumps up international maths rankings following Chinese-fashion teaching". The Telegraph. ISSN 0307-1235. Retrieved eleven August 2020.
45. ^ Starkey, Hannah (5 December 2019). "Great britain Boost International Maths Ranking Afterwards Adopting Chinese-Fashion Pedagogy". Truthful Education Partnerships . Retrieved 11 Baronial 2020.
46. ^ PISA 2012: Proficiency of Finnish youth failing University of Jyväskylä. Retrieved 9 Dec 2013
47. ^ Hemali Chhapia, TNN (3 August 2012). "India backs out of global instruction test for 15-year-olds". The Times of Republic of india. Archived from the original on 29 Apr 2013.
48. ^ "Poor PISA score: Govt blames 'disconnect' with Bharat". The Indian Express. 3 September 2012.
49. ^ "India chickens out of international students assessment programme over again". The Times of Bharat. 1 June 2013.
50. ^ "PISA Tests: India to accept part in global teen learning test in 2021". The Indian Limited. 22 February 2017. Retrieved 19 May 2018.
51. ^ "Ong: Did ministry building try to rig results for Pisa 2015 report?". eight December 2016.
52. ^ "Who's telling the truth most M'sia'due south Pisa 2015 scores?". 9 December 2016.
53. ^ "Malaysian PISA results under scrutiny for lack of testify – School Advisor". 8 December 2016.
54. ^ Lars Näslund (iii December 2013) Svenska skolan rasar i stor jämförelse Expressen. Retrieved iv December 2013 (in Swedish)
55. ^ ^{a b} Jens Kärrman (iii Dec 2013) Löfven om Pisa: Nationell kris Dagens Nyheter. Retrieved 8 December 2013 (in Swedish)
56. ^ "Sveriges PISA-framgång bygger på falska siffror".
57. ^ ^{a b} Adams, Richard (3 Dec 2013), "United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland students stuck in educational doldrums, OECD study finds", The Guardian , retrieved 4 December 2013
58. ^ Pisa ranks Wales' didactics the worst in the UK BBC. 3 December 2013. Retrieved iv December 2013.
59. ^ Ambrose Evans-Pritchard (iii December 2013) Ambrose Evans-Pritchard Telegraph.co.britain. Retrieved 4 December 2013.
60. ^ "William Stewart, "Is Pisa fundamentally flawed?" Times Educational Supplement, July 26, 2013". Archived from the original on 23 Baronial 2013. Retrieved 26 July 2013.
61. ^ Morrison, Hugh (2013). "A fundamental puzzler in psychology's standard model of measurement and its consequences for PISA global rankings" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 June 2013. Retrieved 13 July 2017.
62. ^ ^{a b} Stewart, "Is PISA fundamentally flawed?" TES (2013).
63. ^ ^{a b c} "Highlights of U.S. PISA 2018 Results Spider web Report" (PDF). {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
64. ^ Hanushek, Eric A., and Ludger Woessmann. 2011. "The economics of international differences in educational achievement." In Handbook of the Economics of Education, Vol. 3, edited past Eric A. Hanushek, Stephen Machin, and Ludger Woessmann. Amsterdam: Due north Kingdom of the netherlands: 89–200.
65. ^ Hanushek, Eric; Woessmann, Ludger (2008), "The office of cognitive skills in economic development" (PDF), Journal of Economic Literature, 46 (iii): 607–668, doi:ten.1257/jel.46.3.607
66. ^ Rindermann, Heiner; Ceci, Stephen J (2009), "Educational policy and country outcomes in international cognitive competence studies", Perspectives on Psychological Science, four (six): 551–577, doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01165.x, PMID 26161733, S2CID 9251473
67. ^ Bishop, John H (1997). "The effect of national standards and curriculum-based exams on achievement". American Economic Review. Papers and Proceedings. 87 (2): 260–264. JSTOR 2950928.
68. ^ Hanushek, Eric; Woessmann, Ludger (2006), "Does educational tracking impact operation and inequality? Differences-in-differences evidence across countries" (PDF), Economical Periodical, 116 (510): C63–C76, doi:x.1111/j.1468-0297.2006.01076.10
69. ^ Alexander, Ruth (10 December 2013). "How accurate is the Pisa test?". BBC News . Retrieved 22 Nov 2019.
70. ^ Flows, Capital. "Are The PISA Education Results Rigged?". Forbes . Retrieved 22 November 2019.
71. ^ Guardian Staff (6 May 2014). "OECD and Pisa tests are damaging education worldwide – academics". Retrieved 22 November 2019 – via world wide web.theguardian.com.
72. ^ Cafardo, Rafael (4 December 2019). "Escolas privadas de aristocracy practice Brasil superam Finlândia no Pisa, rede pública vai pior practise que o Peru". Retrieved 4 December 2019 – via world wide web.estadao.com.br.

External links [edit]

• OECD/PISA website
  • OECD (1999): Measuring Student Knowledge and Skills: A New Framework for Cess. Paris: OECD, ISBN 92-64-17053-7
  • OECD (2014): PISA 2012 results: Creative problem solving: Students' skills in tackling real-life bug (Book V) [2]
• OECD'southward Teaching GPS: Interactive data from PISA 2015
• PISA Data Explorer
• Gunda Tire: "Estonians believe in education, and this belief has been essential for centuries"—Interview of Gunda Tire, OECD PISA National Project Manager, for Caucasian Journal

forrestertakedent.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment

Share this post