Programme for International Student Assessment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a world-wide evaluation of 15-year-old school children's scholastic performance, performed first in 2000 and repeated every three years. It is coordinated by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), with a view to improving educational policies and outcomes.
Contents |
[edit] Framework
PISA stands in a tradition of international school studies, undertaken since the late 1950s by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). Much of PISA's methodology follows the example of the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS, started in 1995), which in turn was much influenced by the U.S. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The reading component of PISA is inspired by the IEA's Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS).
PISA aims at testing literacy in three competence fields: reading, mathematics, science.
The PISA mathematics literacy test asks students to apply their mathematical knowledge to solve problems set in various real-world contexts. To solve the problems students must activate a number of mathematical competencies as well as a broad range of mathematical content knowledge. TIMSS, on the other hand, measures more traditional classroom content such as an understanding of fractions and decimals and the relationship between them (curriculum attainment). PISA claims to measure education's application to real-life problems and life-long learning (workforce knowledge).
In the reading test, "OECD/PISA does not measure the extent to which 15-year-old students are fluent readers or how competent they are at word recognition tasks or spelling". Instead, they should be able to "construct, extend and reflect on the meaning of what they have read across a wide range of continuous and non-continuous texts"[1]
[edit] Development and implementation
Developed from 1997, the first PISA assessment was carried out in 2000. The results of each period of assessment take about one year and half to be analysed. First results were published in November 2001. The release of raw data and the publication of technical report and data handbook took only place in spring 2002. The triennial repeats follow a similar schedule; the process of seeing through a single PISA cycle, start-to-finish, always takes over four years.
Every period of assessment focusses on one of the three competence fields reading, math, science; but the two others are tested as well. After nine years, a full cycle is completed: after 2000, reading is again the main domain in 2009.
| Period | Main focus | # OECD countries | # other countries | # students | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | Reading | 28 | 4 | 265,000 | Netherlands disqualified from data analysis. 11 additional non-OECD countries took the test in 2002 |
| 2003 | Mathematics | 30 | 11 | 275,000 | UK disqualified from data analysis. Also included test in problem solving. |
| 2006 | Science | 30 | 27 | ||
| 2009 | Reading | 30 | 33? | results will be published in fall 2010 |
PISA is sponsored, governed, and coordinated by the OECD. The test design, implementation, and data analysis is delegated to an international consortium of research and educational institutions led by the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). ACER leads in developing and implementing sampling procedures and assisting with monitoring sampling outcomes across these countries. The assessment instruments fundamental to PISA’s Reading, Mathematics, Science, Problem-solving, Computer-based testing, background and contextual questionnaires are similarly constructed and refined by ACER. ACER also develops purpose-built software to assist in sampling and data capture, and analyses all data. The source code of the data analysis software is not made public.
[edit] Method of testing
[edit] Sampling
The students tested by PISA are aged between 15 years and 3 months and 16 years and 2 months at the beginning of the assessment period. The school year pupils are in is not taken into consideration. Only students at school are tested, not home-schoolers. In PISA 2006 , however, several countries also used a grade-based sample of students. This made it possible also to study how age and school year interact.
To fulfill OECD requirements, each country must draw a sample of at least 5,000 students. In small countries like Iceland and Luxembourg, where there are less than 5,000 students per year, an entire age cohort is tested. Some countries used much larger samples than required in order to allow comparisons between regions.
[edit] The test
Each student takes a two-hour handwritten test. Part of the test is multiple-choice and part involves fuller answers. In total there are six and a half hours of assessment material, but each student is not tested on all the parts. Following the cognitive test, participating students spend nearly one more hour answering a questionnaire on their background including learning habits, motivation and family. School directors also fill in a questionnaire describing school demographics, funding etc.
In selected countries, PISA started also experimentation with computer adaptive testing.
[edit] National add-ons
Countries are allowed to combine PISA with complementary national tests.
Germany does this in a very extensive way: on the day following the international test, students take a national test called PISA-E (E=Ergänzung=complement). Test items of PISA-E are closer to TIMSS than to PISA. While only about 5,000 German students participate in both the international and the national test, another 45,000 take only the latter. This large sample is needed in order to allow an analysis by federal states. Following a clash about the interpretation of 2006 results, the OECD warned Germany that it might withdraw the right to use the "PISA" label for national tests.[2]
[edit] Data Scaling
From the beginning, PISA has been designed with one particular method of data analysis in mind. Since students work on different test booklets, raw scores must be scaled to allow meaningful comparisons. This scaling is done using the Rasch model of item response theory (IRT). According to IRT, it is not possible to assess the competence of students who solved none or all of the test items. This problem is circumvented by imposing a Gaussian prior probability distribution of competences.[3]
One and the same scale is used to express item difficulties and student competences. The scaling procedure is tuned such that the a posteriori distribution of student competences, with equal weight given to all OECD countries, has mean 500 and standard deviation 100.
[edit] Results
[edit] League Tables
All PISA results are broken down by countries. Public attention concentrates on just one outcome: achievement mean values by countries. These data are regularly published in form of "league tables".
The following table gives the mean achievements of OECD member countries in the principal testing domain of each period:
| 2000 | 2003 | 2006 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reading literacy | Mathematics | Science | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
In the official reports, country rankings are communicated in a more elaborate form: not as lists, but as cross tables, indicating for each pair of countries whether or not mean score differences are statistically significant. In favorable cases, a difference of 9 points is sufficient to be considered significant (i.e. unlikely to be due to random fluctuations in student sampling or in item functioning).
Results from the three domains are closely correlated. Performing a factor analysis or a principal components analysis, one could easily construct an overall achievement scale and deduce a domain-independent country ranking. Such analysis, however, is not undertaken in the official reports, most likely because in order to avoid that PISA be interpreted as an intelligence test, which according to some claims[4] it actually is. Unavoidably, a general factor is also constructed when PISA data are used as input to a meta-index like the United Nation's Education Index.
[edit] Comparison with other studies
The correlation between PISA 2003 and TIMSS 2003 grade 8 country means is 0.84 in math, 0.95 in science. The values go down to 0.66 and 0.79 if the two worst performing developping countries are excluded. Western countries generally performed better in PISA; Eastern European and Asian countries in TIMSS. Content balance and years of schooling explain most of the variation.[5]
[edit] Topical studies
An evaluation of the 2003 results showed that the countries which spent more on education did not necessarily do better than those which spent less. Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Finland, Japan, Korea, New Zealand and the Netherlands spent less but did relatively well, whereas the United States spent much more but was below the OECD average. The Czech Republic, in the top ten, spent only one third as much per student as the United States did, for example, but the USA came 24th out of 29 countries compared.
Another point made in the evaluation was that students with higher-earning parents are better-educated and tend to achieve higher results. This was true in all the countries tested, although more obvious in certain countries, such as Germany.
[edit] Reception
For many countries, the first PISA results were surprising; in Germany and the United States, for example, the comparatively low scores brought on heated debate about how the school system should be changed.[citation needed] Some headlines in national newspapers, for example, were:
- "La France, élève moyen de la classe OCDE" (France, average student of the OECD class) Le Monde, December 5, 2001
- "Miserable Noten für deutsche Schüler" (Abysmal marks for German students) Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, December 4, 2001
- "Are we not such dunces after all?" The Times, England, December 6, 2001
- "Economic Time Bomb: U.S. Teens Are Among Worst at Math" Wall Street Journal December 7, 2004
- "Preocupe-se. Seu filho é mal educado." (Be worried. Your child is badly educated.) Veja November 7, 2007
- "La educación española retrocede" (Spanish education moving backwards) El País December 5, 2007
- "Finnish teens score high marks in latest PISA study" Helsingin Sanomat November 30, 2007
[edit] Criticism
Criticism has ensued in Luxembourg which scored quite low, over the method used in its PISA test. Although being a trilingual country, the test was not allowed to be done in Luxembourgish, the mother tongue of a majority of students[citation needed].
[edit] References
- ^ Chapter 2 of the publication "PISA 2003 Assessment Framework", pdf
- ^ C. Füller: Pisa hat einen kleinen, fröhlichen Bruder. taz, 5.12.2007 [1]
- ^ The scaling procedure is described in nearly identical terms in the Technical Reports of PISA 2000, 2003, 2006. It is similar to procedures employed in NAEP and TIMSS. According to J. Wuttke [Die Insignifikanz signifikanter Unterschiede.] (2007, in German), the description in the Technical Reports is incomplete and plagued by notational errors.
- ^ H. Rindermann: The g-factor of international cognitive ability comparisons: the homogeneity of results in PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS and IQ-tests across nations. European Journal of Personality, 21, 667-706 (2007) [2]. V. Weiss: National IQ means transformed from PISA Scores. The Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies, 34, 71-94 (2009) [3].
- ^ M. L. Wu: A Comparison of PISA and TIMSS 2003 achievement results in Mathematics. Paper presented at the AERA Annual Meeting, New York, March, 2008. [4].
[edit] Further Reading
[edit] Official websites and reports
- OECD/PISA website (Javascript required)
- OECD (1999): Measuring Student Knowledge and Skills. A New Framework for Assessment. Paris: OECD, ISBN 92-64-17053-7 [5]
- OECD (2003a): The PISA 2003 Assessment Framework. Mathematics, Reading, Science and Problem Solving Knowledge and Skills. Paris: OECD, ISBN 978-92-64-10172-2 [6]
- OECD (2004a): Learning for Tomorrow's World. First Results from PISA 2003. Paris: OECD, ISBN 978-92-64-00724-6 [7]
- OECD (2004b): Problem Solving for Tomorrow's World. First Measures of Cross-Curricular Competencies from PISA 2003. Paris: OECD, ISBN 978-92-64-00642-3
- OECD (2005): PISA 2003 Technical Report. Paris: OECD, ISBN 978-92-64-01053-6
- OECD (2007): Science Competencies for Tomorrow's World: Results from PISA 2006 [8]
[edit] About reception and political consequences
- General:
- A. P. Jakobi, K. Martens: Diffusion durch internationale Organisationen: Die Bildungspolitik der OECD. In: K. Holzinger, H. Jörgens, C. Knill: Transfer, Diffusion und Konvergenz von Politiken. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2007.
- France:
- N. Mons, X. Pons: The reception and use of Pisa in France.
- Germany:
- E. Bulmahn [then federal secretary of education]: PISA: the consequences for Germany. OECD observer, no. 231/232, May 2002. pp.33-34.
- H. Ertl: Educational Standards and the Changing Discourse on Education: The Reception and Consequences of the PISA Study in Germany. Oxford Review of Education, v32 n5 p619-634 Nov 2006.
- United Kingdom:
- S. Grek, M. Lawn, J. Ozga: Study on the Use and Circulation of PISA in Scotland. [9]
[edit] Criticism
- Books:
- S. Hopmann, G. Brinek, M. Retzl (eds.): PISA zufolge PISA. PISA According to PISA. LIT-Verlag, Wien 2007, ISBN 3-8258-0946-3 (partly in German, partly in English)
- T. Jahnke, W. Meyerhöfer (eds.): PISA & Co – Kritik eines Programms. Franzbecker, Hildesheim 2007 (2nd edn.), ISBN 978-3-88120-464-4 (in German)
- Websites:
- J . Wuttke: Critical online bibliography
|
||||||||||||||||||||