Post on 06-May-2015
description
OECD EMPLOYER BRAND
Playbook
1
Insights from PISA for Schools and Lo-cal Educators
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)
Alejandro Gomez Palma
Policy Analyst
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Presentation for Local Educators from the USA
1 April 2014
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 PISA 2012 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• 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 – e.g. PISA for Schools• Productive feedback to fuel improvement at every level of the system .
Math teaching and learning ≠ math teaching and learning
PISA = reason mathematically and understand, formulate, employand interpret mathematical concepts, facts and procedures (not curriculum-
based but content is important)
4
5
The real world The world of mathematics
A real situation
Mathematical model
Results of the mathematical
procedure
Real results
Understanding the situation, structuring and simplifying it
Transforming the problem to be dealt with mathematics
Interpreting the mathematical results
Employing mathematical tools to solve a problem
Validating the results
PISA = competencies, skills and content = reason mathematically and use mathematical concepts, procedures, facts and tools
A model from reality
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 (answer code: pisa1a)
B. 710 (answer code: pisa1b)
C. 3400 (answer code: pisa1c)
D. 7100 (answer code: pisa1d)
E. 7400 (answer code: pisa1e)
PISA 2012 Sample Question
7
Climbing Mount FujiCorrect Answer: C. 3400
This item belongs to the quantity category. The notion of quantity may be the most pervasive and essential mathematical aspect of engaging with, and functioning in, our world. It incorporates the quantification of attributes of objects, relationships, situations and entities in the world, understanding various representations of those quantifications, and judging interpretations and arguments based on quantity.
SCORING:
Description: Identify an average daily rate given a total number and a specific time period (dates provided)
Mathematical content area:
Quantity
Context: Societal
Process: Formulate
PISA 2012 Sample Question 1
9
Helen the CyclistHelen has just got a new bike. It has a speedometer which sits on the handlebar. The speedometer can tell Helen the distance she travels and her average speed for a trip.
Helen rode 6 km to her aunt’s house. Her speedometer showed that she had averaged 18 km/h for the whole trip.
Which one of the following statements is correct?
A. It took Helen 20 minutes to get to her aunt’s house. (answer code: pisa2a)
B. It took Helen 30 minutes to get to her aunt’s house. (answer code: pisa2b)
C. It took Helen 3 hours to get to her aunt’s house. (answer code: pisa2c)
D. It is not possible to tell how long it took Helen to get to her aunt’s house. (answer code: pisa2d)
PISA 2012 Sample Question 2
10
Correct Answer: A. It took Helen 20 minutes to get to her aunt’s house.
This item belongs to the change and relationships category. This involves understanding fundamental types of change and recognising when they occur in order to use suitable mathematical models to describe and predict change.
SCORING:
Description: Calculate time travelled given average speed and distance travelled
Mathematical content area:
Change and relationships
Context: Personal
Process: Employ
Helen the Cyclist
PISA 2012 Sample Question 2
11
Percent of 15-year-olds who scored Level 3 or Above
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Serie
s1
OECD average
United States
PISA 2012 Sample Question 2
410
420
430
440
450
460
470
480
490
500
510
520
530
540
550
560
570
580Mean score
High mathematics performance
Low mathematics performance
… Shanghai-China performs above this line (613)
… 12 countries perform below this line
Average performanceof 15-year-olds in
MathematicsFig I.2.13
US
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Florida
26% of American 15-year-olds do not reach PISA Level 2
(OECD average 23%, Shanghai 4%, Japan 11%, Canada 14%, Some estimate
long-term economic cost to be US$72 trillion )
Socially equitable distribution of learning
opportunities
High mathematics performance
Low mathematics performance
Average performanceof 15-year-olds in
mathematics
Strong socio-economic impact on student
performance
02468101214161820222426
AustraliaAustria
Belgium Canada
Chile
Czech Rep.
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
IcelandIreland
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
SerbiaRomania
Bulgaria United Arab Emirates
KazakhstanThailand
Malaysia
2012Shanghai-China
Socially equitable distribution of learning
opportunities
Strong socio-economic impact on student
performance
AustraliaAustria
Belgium Canada
Chile
Czech Rep.
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
IcelandIreland
Israel
Italy
Japan
Korea
Luxembourg
Mexico
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Slovak Rep.
Slovenia
Spain Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
UK
US
AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech Rep.DenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandsNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak Rep.SloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUKUS
2012
Socially equitable distribution of learning
opportunities
Strong socio-economic impact on student
performance
AustraliaAustria
Belgium Canada
Chile
Czech Rep.
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
IcelandIreland
Israel
Italy
Japan
Korea
Luxembourg
Mexico
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Slovak Rep.
Slovenia
Spain Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
UK
US
AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech Rep.DenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandsNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak Rep.SloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUKUS
AustraliaAustria
Belgium Canada
Chile
Czech Rep.
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
IcelandIreland
Israel
Italy
Japan
Korea
Luxembourg
Mexico
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Slovak Rep.
Slovenia
Spain Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
UK
US
AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech Rep.DenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandsNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak Rep.SloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUKUS
Singapore
Shanghai
Singapore
2003 - 2012 Germany, Turkey and Mexico improved both their mathematics performance and equity levels
AustraliaAustria
Belgium Canada
Chile
Czech Rep.
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
IcelandIreland
Israel
Italy
Japan
Korea
Luxembourg
Mexico
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Slovak Rep.
Slovenia
Spain Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
UK
US
AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech Rep.DenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandsNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak Rep.SloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUKUS
Singapore
2003 - 2012 Germany, Turkey and Mexico improved both their mathematics performance and equity levels
Germany, Turkey and
Mexico saw significant
improvements in both
math performance and
equity between 2003
and 2012
AustraliaAustria
Belgium Canada
Chile
Czech Rep.
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
IcelandIreland
Israel
Italy
Japan
Korea
Luxembourg
Mexico
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Slovak Rep.
Slovenia
Spain Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
UK
US
AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech Rep.DenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandsNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak Rep.SloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUKUS
Singapore
2003 - 2012 Germany, Turkey and Mexico improved both their mathematics performance and equity levels
Brazil, Italy, Macao-China, Poland, Portugal,
Russian Federation, Thailand and Tunisia
saw significant improvements in math performance between
2003 and 2012(adding countries with more recent trends results in 25 countries with
improvements in math)
AustraliaAustria
Belgium Canada
Chile
Czech Rep.
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
IcelandIreland
Israel
Italy
Japan
Korea
Luxembourg
Mexico
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Slovak Rep.
Slovenia
Spain Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
UK
US
AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech Rep.DenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandsNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak Rep.SloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUKUS
Singapore
2003 - 2012 Germany, Turkey and Mexico improved both their mathematics performance and equity levels
Norway, the United States and Switzerland improved equity between 2003 and 2012
Of the 65 countries… …45 improved in at least one subject
22
23
Mathematics, reading and science Israel, Poland, Portugal, Turkey, Brazil, Dubai (UAE), Hong Kong-China, Macao-China, Qatar, Singapore, Tunisia
Mathematics and readingChile, Germany, Mexico, Albania, Montenegro, Serbia, Shanghai-China
Mathematics and scienceItaly, Kazakhstan, Romania
Reading and scienceJapan, Korea, Latvia, Thailand
Mathematics onlyGreece, Bulgaria, Malaysia, United Arab Emirates (ex. Dubai)
Reading only Estonia, Hungary, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Colombia, Indonesia, Liechtenstein, Peru, Russian Federation, Chinese Taipei
Science onlyIreland
Improvement in mathematics, reading or science
24
Shang
hai-C
hina
Hong
Kong-
China
Viet N
amKor
ea
Liec
hten
stein
Switzer
land
Nethe
rland
s
Belgi
um
Canad
a
Austri
a
New Z
eala
nd
Franc
e
Irela
nd
OECD ave
rage
Slova
k Rep
ublic
Hunga
ryIta
ly
Unite
d Kin
gdom
Lith
uani
a
Unite
d Sta
tes
Sweden
Roman
ia
Serbi
a
Greec
eChi
le
Mal
aysia
Cypru
s5, 6
Costa
Rica
Brazil
Tunisi
aPer
u
Colom
biaQat
ar340
360
380
400
420
440
460
480
500
520
540
560
580
600
Mean score at the country level before adjusting for socio-economic statusMean score at the country level after adjusting for socio economic status
Me
an
ma
the
ma
tic
s s
co
reMathematics performance in a level playing fieldMean mathematics performance after accounting for socio-economic status
Fig II.3.3
25
Shang
hai-C
hina
Mac
ao-C
hina
Singa
pore
Chine
se T
aipe
i
Liec
hten
stein
Estoni
a
Polan
d
Finl
and
Portu
gal
Turk
ey Italy
Latvi
a
Austra
lia
Austri
a
Czech
Rep
ublic
Unite
d Kin
gdom
Fran
ce
Icela
nd
Russia
n Fe
d.
Croat
ia
Sweden
Slova
k Rep
ublic
Serbi
aIsr
ael
Roman
ia
Indo
nesia
Kazak
hsta
n
Brazil
Chile
Mon
tene
gro
Argen
tina
Peru
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
%
Percentage of resilient students
More than 10% resilient Between 5%-10% of resilient students Less than 5%
Fig II.2.4
A resilient student is situated in the bottom quarter of the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS) in their own country and yetperforms in the top quarter of students among all countries, after accounting for socio-economic status.
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.
Comparisons of performance Table I.2.3b
Peru 22 years vs Indonesia 45 years
Qatar 13 years vs Tunisia 35 years
Brazil 42 years vs Kazakhstan 9 years
2003
2007
2011
2015
2019
2023
2027
2031
2035
2039
2043
2047
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Catching up to the OECD Average in Mathematics
QatarTunisiaOECD
Mean
Perf
orm
an
ce in
Ma-
them
ati
cs
2006
2009
2012
2015
2018
2021
2024
2027
2030
2033
2036
2039
2042
2045
2048
2051
2054
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900Catching up to the OECD Average in
Science
BrazilKaza-khstanOECD
Mean
Perf
orm
an
ce in
Scie
nce
2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
2020
2024
2028
2032
2036
2040
2044
2048
2052
2056
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700Catching up to the OECD Average in Reading
Peru
Indonesia
OECD
Mean
Perf
orm
an
ce in
Read
ing
26
Stu
dent
perf
orm
ance
AdvantagePISA Index of socio-economic back-ground
Disadvantage
700
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3200
493
School performance and socio-economic background: United States27
Student performance and students’ socio-economic background
School performance and schools’ socio-economic background
Private school Public school in rural area Public school in urban area
Student performance and students’ socio-economic background within schoolsSchools with similiar socio-economic backgrounds
28
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3200
494
School performance and socio-economic background: Viet Nam
AdvantagePISA Index of socio-economic backgroundDisadvantage
Student performance and students’ socio-economic background
School performance and schools’ socio-economic background
Private school Public school in rural area Public school in urban area
Student performance and students’ socio-economic background within schools
Stu
dent
per
form
ance
700
Pe
ru
Me
xico
Ind
on
esi
a
Co
lom
bia
Tu
rke
y
Un
ited
Sta
tes
Au
stra
lia
Vie
t Na
m
Sh
an
gh
ai-
Ch
ina
Ro
ma
nia
Isra
el
Ch
ine
se T
aip
ei
Ire
lan
d
Tu
nis
ia
Ca
na
da
Ma
cao
-Ch
ina
Lu
xem
bo
urg
Ru
ssia
n F
ed
.
Be
lgiu
m
Sw
itze
rla
nd
Ho
ng
Ko
ng
-Ch
ina
Lith
ua
nia
Ka
zakh
sta
n
Cze
ch R
ep
ub
lic
Est
on
ia
Slo
ven
ia
Sin
ga
po
re
Slo
vak
Re
pu
blic
Ko
rea
Se
rbia
No
rwa
y
Fin
lan
d
Alb
an
ia
-2.00
-1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
0.50
Difference between socio-economically disadvantaged and socio-economically advantaged schools
Me
an
ind
ex
dif
fere
nc
eEducational resources are more problematic in disadvantaged schools, also in public schools in most countries
Advantaged and private schools reported better educational resources
Disadvantaged and public schools reported better educational resources
Fig IV.3.829
30H
on
g K
on
g-C
hin
a
Ko
rea
+L
iech
ten
ste
in
Ma
cao
-Ch
ina
+Ja
pa
n
Sw
itze
rla
nd
B
elg
ium
-N
eth
erl
an
ds
-G
erm
an
y
Po
lan
d +
Ca
na
da
-F
inla
nd
-N
ew
Ze
ala
nd
-A
ust
ralia
-A
ust
ria
O
EC
D a
vera
ge
20
03
-F
ran
ce
Cze
ch R
ep
ub
lic -
Lu
xem
bo
urg
Ic
ela
nd
-S
lova
k R
ep
ub
lic
Ire
lan
d
Po
rtu
ga
l +
De
nm
ark
-Ita
ly +
No
rwa
y -
Hu
ng
ary
U
nite
d S
tate
s
Sw
ed
en
-S
pa
in
La
tvia
R
uss
ian
Fe
de
ratio
n
Tu
rke
y
Gre
ece
T
ha
ilan
d
Uru
gu
ay
-T
un
isia
B
razi
l M
exi
co
Ind
on
esi
a 0
10
20
30
40
2012 2003%
Percentage of top performers in mathematics in 2003 and 2012
Fig I.2.23
Across OECD, 13% of students are top performers (Level 5 or 6). They can develop and work with models for complex situations, and work strategically with advanced thinking and reasoning skills
31 Gender differences in reading performance
Jord
an
Bulga
ria
Finla
nd
U.A.E
.
Thaila
nd
Sweden
Greec
e
Norway
Turke
yIsr
ael
Estoni
a
Roman
ia
Russia
n Fed
.
Slova
k Rep
ublic
Italy
Argen
tina
Austri
a
Switzer
land
Urugu
ay
Austra
lia
Chine
se T
aipe
i
Belgi
um
Unite
d Sta
tes
Tunisi
a
Luxe
mbo
urg
Irela
nd
Nethe
rland
s
Costa
Rica
Liec
hten
stein
Shang
hai-C
hina
Korea
Peru
Alban
ia-80
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
Sc
ore
-po
int
dif
fere
nc
e (
bo
ys
-gir
ls)
In all countries and economies girls perform better than boys
Fig I.4.12
The share of immigrant students in OECD countries increased from 9% in 2003 to 12% in 2012…
…while the performance disadvantage of immigrant students shrank by 11 score points during the same period (after accounting for socio-
economic factors)
32
33
Hu
ng
ary
-
Au
stra
lia -
Ma
cao
-Ch
ina
Slo
vak
Re
pu
blic
-
Tu
rke
y
Ne
w Z
ea
lan
d -
Ire
lan
d
Ca
na
da
La
tvia
Ho
ng
Ko
ng
-Ch
ina
Un
ited
Kin
gd
om
Un
ited
Sta
tes
Th
aila
nd
Ru
ssia
n F
ed
era
tion
Cze
ch R
ep
ub
lic
OE
CD
ave
rag
e 2
00
3 -
Lu
xem
bo
urg
Po
rtu
ga
l
No
rwa
y
Italy
+
Lie
chte
nst
ein
Gre
ece
Ice
lan
d
Sp
ain
Ge
rma
ny
-
Bra
zil
Ne
the
rla
nd
s
Sw
ed
en
Au
stri
a
Be
lgiu
m -
Sw
itze
rla
nd
-
De
nm
ark
Fra
nce
Me
xico
Fin
lan
d
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
2012 2003
Sc
ore
po
int
dif
fere
nc
e (
wit
ho
ut-
wit
h im
mig
.)
Students without an immigrant background perform better
Students with an immigrant background perform better
Change between 2003 and 2012 in immigrant students' mathematics
performance – before accounting for students’ socio-economic statusFig II.3.5
Japa
n
Luxe
mbo
urg
Czech
Rep
ublic
Korea
Thaila
nd
Denm
ark
Italy
Mac
ao-C
hina
Belgi
um
Portu
gal
Spain
Switzer
land
Unite
d Sta
tes
Slova
k Rep
ublic
Russia
n Fed
erat
ion
Irela
nd
Austra
lia
Sweden
Franc
e
Germ
any
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Change between 2003 and 2012 in disciplinary climate in schools
Me
an
ind
ex
ch
an
ge
In most countries and economies, the disciplinary climate in schools improved between 2003 and 2012
Disciplinary climate declined
Disciplinary climateimproved
Fig IV.5.13
35 Motivation to learn mathematics
Percentage of students who reported "agree" or "strongly agree" with the following statements:
I enjoy reading about mathematics
I look forward to my mathematics lessons
I do mathematics because I enjoy it
I am interested in the things I learn in mathematics
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
United States Shanghai-China
%
Fig III.3.9
36
-0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
481.366786279212
517.501096817955
561.241096454551
391.459888954175
499.749902827587
452.973426858907
409.291567937716
493.934230896316
520.545521676786518.750335282979
394.329333356314
471.131460759248
490.571021411359
481.644744006327489.845098037208
513.525055819928
478.823277433358
505.540743249801
498.95788231768
559.824796201498
494.98467432064426.737491293011
536.406918234208
447.984414978954 478.260635903011
477.044455015488504.150766311124
466.48143014931
518.078519433354
501.497460196644438.738259877415
385.595556395556
422.632355405519
538.134494733918
U.A.E.
514.745238582901522.971758192682
484.319297801971
388.431709907139
375.114451681749
500.026756625414
431.798408505078
368.102547127357
406.999866988793
530.931003950397
409.626613284347
387.824629620249
492.795697239492
501.127422390953
376.4483986347
573.468314296641
487.063181343903
489.373070348755
376.488601072821
420.512967619054
413.281466667708
534.96508297892
553.766659143613
448.859130247604
Russian Fed.
444.554242787643
511.338207501182
485.321181012553
612.675536305453
f(x) = 138.160916953927 x + 477.587612682211R² = 0.368631715648504
Mean index of mathematics self-efficacy
Me
an
ma
the
ma
tic
s p
erf
orm
an
ce
OE
CD
av
era
ge
Countries where students have stronger beliefsin their abilities perform better in mathematics
Fig III.4.5
Schools with more autonomy perform better than schools with less autonomy in systems with more accountability arrangements
Less school autonomy
More school autonomy
464
466
468
470
472
474
476
478
School data not public
School data public
Score points
School autonomy for curriculum and assessment x system's level of posting achievement data publicly
Fig IV.1.1637
Less school autonomy
More school autonomy
455
460
465
470
475
480
485
No mathematics standards
Central mathematics standards
Schools with more autonomy perform better than schools with less autonomy in systems with more accountability arrangements
Score points
School autonomy for curriculum and assessment x System's extent of implementing a standardised policy
Fig IV.1.16
39
Attract• Attract the best students to the teaching
profession (Examples: Brazil, Korea, Israel, United Kingdom)
• Create incentives to encourage experienced teachers to work in disadvantaged schools (Examples: Brazil, Estonia, Shanghai)
Train• Provide quality training that combines
acquiring knowledge and skills (Examples: Finland, Japan, Turkey)
• Prepare teachers to address specific problems of students, assess and use appropriate remedial methods (E-xamples: Germany, Poland, Canada)
Accompany• Provide mentoring programs for young
teachers (Examples: Germany, Singapore)• Give young teachers the opportunity early in
their career to return to university and improve their skills (Examples: Finland, Germany)
Retain• Develop continuous professional deve-
lopment, which is as important, if not more than initial training (Examples: Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Singapore)
• Provide career advancement opportu-nities (Examples: Quebec, Portugal)
Summary of insights regarding teachers from countries with high per-formance and equity in PISA:
Provides information on the competencies, knowledge, skills and engagement of students, and the learning environment at the school comparable to PISA scales
Tool in support of research and the benchmarking efforts for improvement
Can be used by schools, networks of schools and districts
…To support local improvement
OECD Test for Schools (based on PISA)Uses of the assessment tool
Is not…
• A mandated standardised test
• Intended to influence – in of itself – everyday teaching practices
• An alternative to national, regional PISA participation
• Intended to align completely with the content and curricular standards of a specific country, although there is overlap
• A tool for “rankings” or “league tables”
OECD Test for Schools (based on PISA)Uses of the assessment tool
OECD Test for Schools (based on PISA)What does the actual assessment look like?
Experience for students similar to that of the main PISA tests: ~ 3.25 hours (with breaks and student questionnaire)
Three areas (domains) equally represented (over 90 minutes of assessment items)
Student sample size per school (target): 75 (some schools tested over 100 students)
Contextual information questionnaires for students and school authorities
Paper and pencil for first phase…
Content of school reports provided
I. Introduction: Understanding your school’s results
II. What students at Your School Know and Can Do in Reading, Mathematics and Science
III. Student Engagement and the Learning Environment at Your School
IV. Your School Compared with Similar Schools in Your Country
V. Your School’s Results in an International Context
Annexes School nameSchool DistrictStateUnited States
How your school compares internationallyOECD Test for SchoolsPilot Trial 2012
OECD Test for Schools (based on PISA)Overview of school reports
School-specific results provided
Performance on PISA scales
Relative performance based on background of students (socio-economic status - ESCS)
Learning environment at school
OECD Test for Schools (based on PISA)Overview of school reports
• Teacher-student relations
• Disciplinary climate in English and Mathematics lessons
• Student confidence and attitudes towards mathematics and science
http://youtu.be/tnhLrGM81eI?t=1m58s
Per
form
ance
on
PIS
A s
cale
OECD Test for Schools (based on PISA)Overview of results (from the pilot)
300
400
500
600
700
Schools in theUnited States
Schools in theShanghai-China
Schools in Mexico
PISA 2009 Results
300
400
500
600
700
North Star Academy
Pilot Results
10% above
25% above
50% above/below
25% below
10% below
10% above
25% above
50% above/below
25% below
10% below
10% above
25% above
50% above/below
25% below
10% below
Reading
300
400
500
600
700
300
400
500
600
700
300
400
500
600
700
300
400
500
600
700
Woodson HS
300
400
500
600
700
BASIS Scottsdale
300
400
500
600
700
Langley High School
300
400
500
600
700
Oakton High School
300
400
500
600
700
BASIS Tucson
OECD Test for Schools (based on PISA)Overview of results (from the pilot)
What does the same mean mean?
Brazil
United States
United Kingdom
Poland
Japan
Korea
Shanghai-China
Oakton High School
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Brazil
Mexico
United States
OECD average
United Kingdom
Germany
Poland
Singapore
Japan
Canada
Korea
Finland
Shanghai-China
Langley High school
Oakton High School
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
543 and 543
Reading
Level 1 and be`low Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6
OECD Test for SchoolsSchool Reports
Disciplinary climate and reading performancce
http://youtu.be/tnhLrGM81eI?t=1m36s
Disciplinary climate and reading performancce
Disciplinary climate and mathematics lessons
Quality of teacher-student relations
http://youtu.be/1MzGhxJ5HOg?t=3m17s
Performance and teacher-student relations
Motivation of students to learn science
Self-belief of students in science
Instrumental motivation and self-efficacy of students and performance at your school
Performance needs to be considered not in absolute terms but in terms of equity and relative effectiveness of schools
International benchmarking supported by the assessment is a process – the “real work” begins after receiving the results…
Performance should also be considered in the context of the quality of the learning environment at schools
Importance of peer-to-peer learning opportunities –– and the opportunity to share good practices to help identify “what works”
OECD Test for Schools (based on PISA)What now? Current cycle of testing in the USA
America Achieves – key partners in the USA
EdLeader21 – key partners in the USA
CTB/McGraw-Hill – currently accredited service provider
Spain has finished pilot in four official languages (224 schools)
In UK: England, Wales and Norther Ireland
International Learning Network – Australia….
OECD Test for Schools (based on PISA)Availability in the United States and Internationally
OECD EMPLOYER BRAND
Playbook
58
PISA Insights for Schools and Local Educators
Thank you very much
www.pisa.oecd.org • All national and international
publications
• The complete micro-level database
• Documents and Presentations of PISA for Development